1. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist as well as learned Additional Government Advocate and perused the revision, including the Annexures attached therewith.
2. This criminal revision under Section 102 of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 has been filed against the order dated 08.01.2018 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 2, Gonda in Criminal Appeal No.37 of 2017, which was preferred against the order dated 02.11.2017 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, rejecting the bail of the revisionist in Case Crime No. 101 of 2016, under Sections 302, 201 and 394 IPC lodged at Police Station Chhapiya, District Gonda.
3. The Juvenile Justice Board had rejected the bail application and the appellate Court has affirmed the order passed by the Juvenile Justice Board. The accused-revisionist has been in jail since 18.04.2016. Co-accused, having similar role, was enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 23.04.2019 passed in Bail No.10014 of 2008.
4. Considering the fact that the revisionist is now major, and his co-accused has already been enlarged on bail, I find it a fit case where the accused-revisionist, who is in jail since 18.04.2016, should be enlarged on bail.
5. Thus, this revision is allowed and the impugned orders dated 08.01.2018 and 02.11.2017 are set-aside.
6. Let the accused-revisionist (Neeraj Pandey) accused of the above-mentioned crime number, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court/Magistrate concerned, subject to the following conditions, which are imposed in the interest of justice:-
(i) the accused-revisionist 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 accused-revisionist 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 the accused-revisionist 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; and
(iv) the accused-revisionist 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.
[D.K. Singh, J.] Order Date :- 18.12.2019 MVS/-