Court No. - 85
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6407 of 2019 Applicant :- Lalji Yadav Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Tarkeshwar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Narendra Kumar Johari,J.
Counter affidavit filed on behalf of opposite party, is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
This bail application has been filed by the accused applicant- Lalji Yadav, who is involved Case Crime No.267 of 2015, under Sections 302, 394, 411, 120-B, 34 I.P.C., Police Station- Bansdeeh Road, District-Ballia.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that he has falsely been implicated in the present case. He has not been named in the F.I.R. No identification pared has been taken place. His name came into light on the confessional statement of co-accused. Charge-sheet has been filed. Nothing has been recovered either weapon or money from the possession of the applicant. He has not been convicted in any criminal case. Co- accused Santosh Kumar Yadav, Arvind Kumar Verma and Satyendra Yadav have been granted bail by another co-ordinate Bench of this Court. Copies of bail orders of co-accused have been annexed as annexure-6 to this application. The allegation against applicant is not established by evidence collected in the investigation. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is in jail since 03.08.2018. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial by all means. There is no likelihood for conclusion of trial within near future.
Learned A.G.A has, however, opposed the prayer for grant of bail. He has submitted that applicant has criminal history of three cases, but he has not disputed the above factual contention made by the learned counsel for the accused-applicant.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, perusing the record and also considering the nature of allegations, arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and parity, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a fit case for granting bail.
Let the applicant Lalji Yadav be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Magistrate/Court concerned, subject to following conditions:-
(i) Applicant shall attend the court in accordance with the conditions of the bond executed.
(ii) Applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
(iii) Applicant will not indulge in any criminal activity.
(iv) Applicant shall cooperate with investigation /trial.
(v) 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.
(vi) Applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(vii) In case, the applicant misuse the liberty of bail during trial 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.
(viii) Applicant shall remain present, 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.
Order Date :- 27.11.2019//SK Goswami