Court No. - 60
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 38685 of 2018 Applicant :- Manjeet Pathak @Gyanendra Pathak Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Ravindra Prakash Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Neeraj Tiwari,J.
Supplementary affidavit filed today in Court, is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record.
It is contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is wholly innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case only on the basis of confessional statement made by main accused, who is mother of the deceased. It is next contended that mother of the deceased has accepted in her statement made before Investigating Officer that under aggression, she herself strangulated her daughter. It is next contended that the applicant was also present at the time of death with whom it is alleged to have illicit relation with the deceased. It is next contended that the cause of death is due to asphyxia. It is next contended that the applicant does not has any criminal history and he has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. It is next contended that there are no chances of the applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the prosecution evidence. It is next contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is in jail 19.3.2018 and in case he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail, but could not dispute the aforesaid facts.
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 Manjeet Pathak involved in case crime No. 36 of 2017, under Sections 302, 201, 34 IPC, police station Kaptanganj, District Basti 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 :- 27.10.2018 Arvind