Court No. - 78
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 17629 of 2019 Applicant :- Munnalal Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- S.P.S. Chauhan,Smt. Meenakshi Chauhan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
Heard Mr. S.P.S. Chauhan, learned counsel for the applicants and Mr. Om Prakash Mishra, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the material on record.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicants- Munnalal with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 219 of 2018, under Sections 147, 148, 452, 323, 324, 325, 326 and 506 I.P.C., Police Station-Eka, District- Firozabad during the pendency of the trial.
It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicants that the present first information report has been lodged by Kishanpal on 10th December, 2018 at 17 hours against Munnalala (applicant herein), Mahaveer Singh, Satendra, Padam Singh and Indraveer alleging therein that on 2nd December, 2018 at 05:00 p.m. (evening), due to earlier enmity, all the accused persons entered into his house with lathi, rod and knife and they had beaten the first informant, his wife and his brother Komal Singh due to which they sustained injuries. They also threatened to kill them. It has further been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that as per the version of the first information report, three persons i.e. the first informant, his wife and his brother Komal have sustained injuries, whereas the medical examination of Komal has been conducted only, wherein it has been reported that his leg was fractured and later on the same has been operated and is not in working condition . It has further been argued that for the same incident dated 2nd December, 2018, a first information report has been lodged by the applicant himself on 10th December, 2018 at 13 hours against Kishanpal (first informant herein), Komal Singh (injured herein), Arvind Kumar, Charan Singh, Maanpal and Sudheer Kumar alleging therein that the son of the applicant, namely Satendra went to his farm, all the accused persons surrounded him and they had beaten him by lathi, sticks and sharp edged weapon due to which he sustained injuries, which are serious in nature as per the medical examination report. It is next argued that as per the version of the first information report and as per the statement of the injured, Komal no specific role of assaulting him by sharp edged weapon has been assigned to any of the accused persons.
Only general role of assaulting the first informant, his wife and injured Komal has been assigned to all the accused persons. It has further been argued that since the applicant has purchased an agriculture land from the brother of the first informant, which belongs to him, a quarrel took place between the applicant's side and first informant's side in which both sides have sustained injuries. Learned counsel for the applicants has then argued that it is a cross case and who, out of the two rival groups, is the aggressor, cannot be determined at this stage. 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. The applicant is in jail since 25th February, 2019.
Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicants 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 applicants are released on bail they 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 applicants.
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 applicants 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 applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they 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 applicants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of their 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 their presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicants fail to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against them, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(iv) The applicants 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 applicants 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 them in accordance with law.
(Manju Rani Chauhan, J.) Order Date :- 30.4.2019 Sushil/-