Court No. - 59
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 25412 of 2018 Applicant :- Mohammad Junaid Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Mohd Imdad Siddiqui,Imran Ullah Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Sheshadri Trivedi
Hon'ble Suneet Kumar,J.
Learned counsel for the informant has filed his counter affidavit which is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. appearing for the State and perused the record.
It is urged that co-accused, namely, Azim Uddin driver of the alleged truck has already been enlarged on bail by this court; copy of the bail order has been placed on record; as per the prosecution case the allegation of conspiracy is against co-accused Sakeel who is alleged to have been on the spot at the time of the incident, but on the date of incident he was languishing in jail; applicant is alleged to be the owner of the truck; there is no other evidence against the applicant except the confessional statement of co-accused; the informant has also not named the applicant as the conspirator; applicant has no other reported criminal antecedent; applicant is languishing in jail since 14.2.2018. If he is released on bail, he will never misuse his liberty and will co-operate in the trial.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.
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 applicant-Mohammad Junaid involved in Case Crime No. 700 of 2017, under Sections 302, 279, 338, 304-A, 427, 120-B I.P.C., Police Station Kokhraj, District Kaushambi be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. One lac with two sureties (one should be of his family members) 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 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.
Order Date :- 30.7.2018 Saurabh