Court No. - 79
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 55150 of 2019 Applicant :- Kamlesh Kumar Chaurasiya @ Bantoo Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Syed Imran Ibrahim,Praveen Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ajit Singh,J.
Vakalatnama filed on behalf of opposite party by Shri Umesh Chandra Yadav, Advocate, is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the entire record.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in Case Crime No. 290 of 2018, under Sections 147, 326, 315, 302/34 of IPC, Police Station - Gopiganj, District - Bhadohi with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail.
The incident is alleged to have taken place on 04.08.2018. It has been mentioned in the First Information Report by the informant that in the morning of 04.08.2018 at 6:00 A.M. his daughter-in-law Smt. Arti Chaurasiya was set at fire by pouring kerosene oil on her by accused persons namely Vishwanath Chaurasiya son of Chhote Lal Chaurasiya, his son Kamlesh Kumar @ Bantu Chaurasiya, Bablu Chaurasiya @ Prathamesh Chaurasiya, Rajesh Kumar Chaurasiya @ Toli and Atul Kumar Chaurasiya sons of Vishwanath Chaurasiya on account of partition dispute of a house. Further mention is that during treatment in Swarup Rani Hospital, Allahabad, on 08.08.2018 she gave birth to a child who died just after birth and in the evening, she also succumbed to the burn injuries. After lodging the FIR, matter was investigated and accused were arrested and sent to jail.
Learned counsel for the accused applicant has submitted that accused is quite innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. The role assigned to the present applicant is similar to the role assigned to other accused and all other accused except this applicant have been granted bail by another Bench of this Court. He also submits that the case of this accused may be slightly different from other co-accused that he has threatened to commit rape and only for this reason the applicant cannot be denied the bail parity with other co-accused. Further contention of the learned counsel for the applicant is that on the date of the incident, the deceased was carried to the police station where it was reported that the deceased has sustained accidental burn injuries and was admitted to the Primary Health Centre. The doctor also noted that the deceased has received accidental burn injuries. This fact has been specifically mentioned by the doctor that the person who got admitted the deceased to the Hospital, told that the deceased had sustained accidental burn injuries, a copy of the statement of the concerned doctor is annexed at page No. 57 of the paper book. Lastly, it is argued by the learned counsel for applicant that same role has been assigned to the accused applicant as was assigned to other co-accused who have been already granted bail and therefore, the applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail on the ground bail parity with other co-accused and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.
Learned AGA appearing for State as well as the learned counsel for complainant vehemently opposed the bail application but they could not dispute the fact that initially, it was reported that the deceased has sustained accidental burn injuries. They also could not dispute the plea of bail parity of the applicant with other co-accused.
Keeping in view the submission of learned counsel for the parties, period of detention of the applicant and all the attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, at this stage, prima facie, a case for bail has been made out.
The prayer for bail is granted. The application is allowed.
Let applicant - Kamlesh Kumar Chaurasiya @ Bantoo involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties to the satisfaction of court concerned subject to the following conditions:
(1). The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence and 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;
(2). 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;
(3). In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail 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 may initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(4). 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 default of this condition is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 16.12.2019 LBY