Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2019
  6. /
  7. January

Preetam vs State Of U P

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|30 January, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 2
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1645 of 2019 Applicant :- Preetam Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Umesh Singh,Jitendra Singh,Mayank Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Suneet Kumar,J.
This is second bail application. First bail application was rejected on 09.08.2018.
Heard Sri Amit Kumar holding brief of Sri Umesh Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. appearing for the State.
It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the witnesses of fact (P.W.-1 to P.W. -6) have been examined and all the witnesses have turned hostile; the applicant has no other reported criminal antecedent and he is languishing in jail for the past 10 months since 04.04.2018; there is no likelihood of early disposal of trial and the applicant undertakes that if enlarged on bail he will never misuse his liberty and will co-operate in the trial; there is no possibility of tampering with the evidence or threatening the witnesses.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail.
Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tempering of the witnesses and prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case.
Let the applicant, Preetam, involved in Case Crime No. 330 of 2018 under Sections 302 and 201 I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali Sahar, District Bijnor, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the 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.
Order Date :- 30.1.2019 K.K. Maurya
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

Preetam vs State Of U P

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
30 January, 2019
Judges
  • Suneet Kumar
Advocates
  • Umesh Singh Jitendra Singh Mayank Yadav