Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2018
  6. /
  7. January

Pramod Kumar vs State Of U P

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|19 December, 2018
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 54
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 47695 of 2018 Applicant :- Pramod Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Swatantra Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.
Heard Mr. Swatantra Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant and learned Addl. Government Advocate for the State.
This application for bail has been filed by the applicant- Pramod Kumar seeking his enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 230 of 2018 under Section 306 I.P.C., Police Station- Ganjdundwara, District Kasganj, during the pendency of the trial.
Perused the record.
According to the allegations made in the first information report, it is alleged that one Pramod Kumar, who is the present applicant, used to visit the house of the first informant. On account of visit made by the present applicant, the deceased had scuffle with the applicant on 26.07.2018 and thereafter in the threat of some dire consequences, he committed suicide.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the allegations made in the first information report can in no way implicate the present applicant for an offence punishable under Section 306 I.P.C.. Up to this stage, there is no evidence on the basis of which it can be said that there is any aid, instigation or conspiracy on the part of the applicant in the commission of the alleged crime. It is, thus, urged that the present applicant be enlarged on bail.
Per contra, the learned Addl. Government Advocate has opposed the prayer for bail. However, he could not dispute the factual submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant.
Having heard the learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and the learned counsel for the complainant and upon consideration of the evidence on record as well as the complicity of the applicant but without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant is allowed.
Let the applicant- Pramod Kumar be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-
(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he 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 counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under section 229-A I.P.C..
(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., 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, in accordance with law, under section 174-A I.P.C.
(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 him 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 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 :- 19.12.2018 Pkb/
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Pramod Kumar vs State Of U P

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
19 December, 2018
Judges
  • Rajeev Misra
Advocates
  • Swatantra Kumar