Court No. - 60
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 38683 of 2018 Applicant :- Jugnu Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Amit Misra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Neeraj Tiwari,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record.
It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. It is further submitted that the applicant is not named in the F.I.R. which has been lodged against four persons namely Ranjit, Rani Kinner, Geeta Kinner and Guddu Kinner. It is next submitted that the informant is not an eye witness of the occurrence and no one has witnessed the actual incident or seen the real culprits. It is also submitted that the co-accused Ranjit has fired twice upon the deceased on the provocation of co-accused Rani Kinner and ultimately the deceased died. It is further submitted that the applicant was named for the first time in the statement of informant recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. The statement of informant is based upon the alleged conversation of accused Rani Kinner while she was fleeing away. It is next submitted that there was no motive and intention of the applicant to commit the alleged offence. The applicant was arrested from his house and has been falsely roped in the present case. It is also submitted that there is history of two criminal cases and the applicant has been granted in both the cases. He is languishing in jail since 18.06.2018 and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also perusing the material on record, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, let the applicant namely Jugnu Kumar, involved in Case Crime No.186 of 2018, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Surir, District Mathura be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned on the following conditions that:-
(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates 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 of the Indian Penal Code.
(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. is issued and the 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 of the Indian Penal Code.
(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) 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.
However, It is made clear that in case the applicant indulges in intimidating or threatening any witness, the State or Prosecutor would be at liberty to file an application for cancellation of bail.
Order Date :- 12.10.2018 Rmk.