Court No. - 59
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 35680 of 2018 Applicant :- Mohd. Arif Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Swati Agrawal Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Suneet Kumar,J.
Heard Smt. Swati Agrawal, learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. appearing for the State.
As per the prosecution case, deceased alongwith the applicant while going on scooty was ambushed by two nominated and two unknown persons; they fired indiscriminately causing injury to the deceased, resultantly, deceased succumbed to the injuries; Sonu alias Siraj Ahmad and Pervej Alam were nominated, subsequently, name of the applicant was taken by Sajan and Raju to be involved in the incident; name of the applicant surfaced in the statement of the informant on mere suspicion of having conspired in the murder of the deceased; applicant in his statement recorded under section 161 Cr.P.C. stated that he was a friend of the deceased, a Sabhasad of the ruling party; deceased was instrumental in providing Sabhasad ticket to the applicant; co-accused in their statement stated that they conspired in eliminating the deceased as he was doing parvi on behalf of co-accused Manoj Tiwari in the murder of Shahjade; none of the co-accused have named the applicant except co-accused Raju in his extra judicial statement; there is no evidence against the applicant including C.D.R.; the involvement of the applicant is on mere suspicion of conspiracy. It is lastly submitted that the applicant has no other reported criminal antecedent and he is languishing in jail since 16.05.2018, there is no likelihood of early disposal of trial and the applicant undertakes that if enlarged on bail, he will never misuse his liberty and will co-operate in the trial.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer 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 tempering 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, Mohd. Arif, involved in Case Crime No. 132 of 2018, under Section 302, 307, 120-B, 34 I.P.C. and Section 7 of Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1932, P.S. Phoolpur, District Allahabad, 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 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 :- 25.9.2018 K.K. Maurya