Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
It has been contended on behalf of the applicant that the applicant is not named in the F.I.R. His name came into existence in the alleged extra judicial confession. The confessional statement of the accused given to witness Ajay Veer recorded on 15.11.2015. This extra judicial confessional statement is a week type of evidence, which cannot be relied upon. The applicant has no motive to commit offence. He has no previous criminal history to his credit and he has been falsely implicated in this case.
Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused have also been touched upon at length. It has been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required. It has also been submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 18.11.2015 and in the wake of heavy pendency of cases in the Court, there is no likelihood of any early conclusion of trial. Hence, the applicant is entitled for bail.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail and has submitted that the conviction of the applicant is on the basis of evidence on record, hence the applicant is not entitled for bail.
Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tampering of the witnesses and prima facie satisfaction of the court in support of the charge, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case.
Let the accused-applicant Krishnaveer Yadav alias Dabbal, involved in Case Crime No. 184 of 2015 under Sections 302, 394, 411 and 34 I.P.C., Police Station-Kotwali, District-Moradabad be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions :-
(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 fail 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 date 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.
Order Date :- 12.4.2016 Anurag/-