Court No. - 55
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7202 of 2018 Applicant :- Netrapal Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Amit Kumar Singh,Amit Kumar Singh,Rajesh Kumar Namdev Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the material on record.
By means of this application, the applicant who is involved in case crime no. 615 of 2017, under Sections 302 IPC, P.S. Alapur, District Badaun is seeking enlargement on bail during the trial.
It is contended by the learned counsel for the applicant contended that the applicant is named in the FIR but there is a candid allegation by the informant Dilip who lodged the FIR on 19.08.2017 for the alleged incident on 18.08.2017 attributing to all the assailants that they assaulted by lathi and throwing the dead body in the agricultural field of one Sarvesh, thought the applicant is not an eye witness of the incident but in the statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. first informant and other witnesses have maintained that the death of the deceased was caused by assault from saria.
The entire prosecution story case goes to shambles when the post mortem report reveals that the deceased Deepchand has sustained a ligature mark which is horizontal, continuously placed over the neck. The thyroid hyoid bones are fracture, tracheal rigs was too fractured. The entire prosecution story is not compatible with the post mortem report. He lastly submitted that the applicant who has no criminal antecedent to his credit and is in jail since 13.09.2017 is entitled to be enlarged on bail during the pendency of trial.
Per contra learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. of Sarvesh but broadly speaking cannot dispute the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant.
Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned AGA and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for bail.
In view of the above, let the applicant- Netrapal be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned in case crime no. 615 of 2017, under Sections 302 IPC, P.S. Alapur, District Badaun with the following conditions:-
(i) THE APPLICANT SHALL FILE AN UNDERTAKING TO THE EFFECT THAT HE/SHE SHALL NOT SEEK ANY ADJOURNMENT ON THE DATE 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/HER COUNSEL. IN CASE OF HIS/HER ABSENCE, WITHOUT SUFFICIENT CAUSE, THE TRIAL COURT MAY PROCEED AGAINST HIM/HER UNDER SECTION 229-A IPC.
(iii) IN CASE, THE APPLICANT MISUSES THE LIBERTY OF BAIL DURING TRIAL AND IN ORDER TO SECURE HIS/HER PRESENCE PROCLAMATION UNDER SECTION 82 CR.P.C., MAY BE ISSUED AND IF APPLICANT FAILS TO APPEAR BEFORE THE COURT ON THE DATE FIXED IN SUCH PROCLAMATION, THEN, THE TRIAL COURT SHALL INITIATE PROCEEDINGS AGAINST HIM/HER, IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, UNDER SECTION 174-A IPC.
(iv) THE APPLICANT SHALL REMAIN PRESENT, IN PERSON, BEFORE THE TRIAL COURT ON DATES FIXED FOR (1) OPENING OF THE CASE, (2) FRAMING OF CHARGE AND (3) 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 THE HIM/HER IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW.
(v) THE TRIAL COURT MAY MAKE ALL POSSIBLE EFFORTS/ENDEAVOUR AND TRY TO CONCLUDE THE TRIAL WITHIN A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR AFTER THE RELEASE OF THE APPLICANT.
However, it is made clear that any wilful violation of above conditions by the applicant, shall have serious repercussion on his/her bail so granted by this court and the trial court is at liberty to cancel the bail, after recording the reasons for doing so, in the given case of any of the condition mentioned above.
Order Date :- 26.2.2018 Abhishek Sri.