1. Heard Shri Rajiv Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned Additional Government Advocate for the State of U.P.
2. This is a second bail application filed by the applicant as the earlier having been dismissed as not pressed vide order dated 11.06.2021.
3. The ground indicated in the second bail application are that the other persons who are named in the said FIR have been granted bail and thus parity has been claimed with them.
4. The present bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant seeking bail in pursuance to the First Information Report registered as Case Crime No.93 of 2020, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 504, 302, 34 IPC and 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act, Police Station - Gangaghat, District - Unnao.
5. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that according to the first information report lodged on 10.03.2020, it has been stated that the complainant therein had picked up certain bricks from the Kharanja road which were objected by accused persons, due to which they came armed and assaulted the complainant and his family members in which number of persons have been received injuries. In support of the bail application, learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that in fact the applicant was not aggressor in the particular case inasmuch as the applicant has received lacerated wound on left ear which is evident from the medical report of the applicant Jiyalal annexed. It has further been submitted that in fact the applicant had registered the first information report against the complainant which is numbered as FIR No. 0092/2020 on the same date in regard to the same incident, and therefore, he claims that it is the complainants who were the aggressor and there were number of persons, who received injuries with regard to the small disputes for the bricks taken by the complainant from the Kharanja road. It is lastly submitted that the applicant is aged about 60 years and he is in jail since 18.06.2020.
6. Learned A.G.A. has, however, opposed the prayer for grant of bail but he has submitted that there is cross version of the same occurrence and in the cross version, serious allegations have been levelled against the complainant herein and looking injuries sustained by the applicant, it cannot be said that the applicant was the aggressor in the present case.
7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, perusing the record and also considering the nature of allegations, arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and keeping in mind the fact that the applicant is in jail since 18.06.2020, which is more than one year, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a fit case for granting bail.
8. Let applicant be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Magistrate/Court concerned, subject to 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.
9. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the Court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail and proceed against the applicant in accordance with law.
10. This order shall not influence the trial Court for proceeding with the trial.
11. The application stands disposed of.
Order Date :- 17.8.2021 Pachhere/-