Court No. - 54
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 40730 of 2018 Applicant :- Joravar Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Balbeer Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Nitin Raj
Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.
Two supplementary affidavits on behalf of the applicant in Court today, are taken on record.
Heard Mr. Rajeev Lochan Shukla along with Mr. Balbeer Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and the learned A.G.A. for the State.
This application for bail has been filed by the applicant Joravar Singh seeking his enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 586 of 2018, under Section 306 I.P.C. Police Station Achhenera, District Agra during the pendency of the trial in the above mentioned case crime number.
From the record, it appears that an incident occurred on 29.7.2018, in which one person namely Ramesh Chandra died. It is the nature of the death of this deceased, which is the cause of dispute in the present criminal proceedings. It appears that after the occurrence had taken place as probably the deceased was hit by a moving train, information of the same was communicated by Kehar Singh, the Loco Pilot of Train No. 55342 to the Dy. Station Superintendent, who prepared memo dated 29.7.2018. The communication sent by the Loco Pilot and the memo prepared by the Dy. Station Superintendent clearly state that the deceased had died on account of an accident with a moving train. However, an F.I.R. dated 2.8.2018 was lodged by the brother of the deceased namely Mr. Hukum Singh Pappu, which was registered as Case Crime No. 586 of 2018, under Section 306 I.P.C. Police Station Achhenera, District Agra. In the aforesaid first information report, six persons, namely, Raj Pal, Jorawar Singh, Hansh Lal, Gyan Singh, Badan Singh and Uday Singh were nominated as the named accused. Since the body of the deceased was cremated by the family members of the deceased, neither the inquest nor the post-mortem of the body of the deceased could be performed. The Police upon completion of the statutory investigation of the aforesaid case crime number in terms of Chapter XII Cr.P.C. has submitted a charge-sheet dated 29.10.2018 against one Rajpal and Jorawar Singh, the applicant herein. Upon submission of the charge sheet, cognizance has been taken by the Court concerned, vide cognizance taking order dated 31.10.2018. Thereafter, the case was committed to the Court of Sessions. Accordingly, S.T. No. 703 of 2018 (State Vs. Rajpal) is now said to be pending in the Court of Sessions Judge, Agra.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is not a family member of the deceased. The applicant is in jail since 2.9.2018. The applicant has criminal antecedents to his credit, which have been explained in paragraph Nos. 15 and 16 of the affidavit filed in support of the bail application. It is next contended that the applicant has been charge sheeted under section 306 IPC. The proof of the charge under section 306 IPC is subject to trial evidence. There is no such evidence upto this stage, on the basis of which it can be said that the applicant has played any role in the commission of the alleged crime by way of abetment aid, conspiracy or instigation. Placing reliance upon the communication of the Loco Pilot Kehar Singh, which is on the record of the first supplementary affidavit and memo prepared by Dy. Station Superintendent on 29.7.2018, it is submitted that the deceased had died on account of a train accident. There is no evidence upto this stage to contradict the same. On the aforesaid factual premise, it is urged that the applicant is liable to be enlarged on bail.
Per contra, the learned A.G.A. for the State has opposed the payer for bail. He submits that the applicant is a charge sheeted accused and therefore, does not deserve any sympathy. However, he could not dispute the factual and legal submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant.
Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail.
Let the applicant-Joravar Singh be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-
(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the date fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.
(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under section 229-A I.P.C..
(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under section 82 Cr.P.C., may be issued and if applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under section 174-A I.P.C.
(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) recording of statement under section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.
(v) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial within a period of one year after the release of the applicant.
Order Date :- 27.11.2018 HSM