Court No. - 78
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 30043 of 2019 Applicant :- Lalu Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Surya Bhan Singh,Akhilesh Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
Heard Sri Shiv Nath Singh, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri Akhilesh Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Om Prakash Mishra, learned A.G.A. learned counsel for the State as well as perused the material on record.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant- Lalu with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No.
27 of 2019, under Sections 307 and 504 I.P.C., Police Station-Mirzapur, District-Shahjahanpur, during the pendency of the trial.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the first information report has been lodged by Aditya Singh Yadav @ Karru against three named accused persons including the present applicant alleging therein that on 25th January, 2019 at 07:30 p.m. (morning), the informant was going to his shop, on the way, seeing the informant, all the accused persons, who were already sitting there, started using filthy language against him, when he objected not to do the same, the co- accused Veerpal instigated the applicant to take his country- made pistol and fire upon the informant. On the said instigation, the co-accused Atar Singh caught hold of him and the applicant fired upon him due to which he sustained fire arm injuries. On hearing the noise of fire arm, the brother and mother of the informant came there, on seeing them all the accused persons ran away. It has further been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the injured/informant in his statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., has reiterated the same version as unfolded in the first information report. It has further been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that though the applicant has been assigned the role of causing fire arm injuries to the injured, but as per the medical examination report the injuries sustained by the injured are not on the vital of his body nor the same are dangerous to his life. The applicant is innocent and due to village politics he has been falsely implicated in the present case.
Learned counsel for the applicant has also pressed the issue of period of detention of the applicant i.e. 25th January, 2019, who has undergone more than six months of incarceration. He, therefore, submits that considering the larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh v. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 no useful purpose would be served in keeping the applicant behind the bars.
The applicant has no criminal antecedents to his credit except the present one. It is next contended that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses and in case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail.
Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, he does not deserves any indulgence. In case the applicant is released on bail he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail. However, the learned A.G.A. could not dispute the factual submissions as urged by the learned counsel for the applicant.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and the material on record as well as the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. & Another reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 and without expressing any opinion on merit of the case, let the applicant involved in aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to 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 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.
(Manju Rani Chauhan, J.) Order Date :- 26.7.2019 Sushil/-