Court No. - 89
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 13028 of 2021 Applicant :- Raeesh Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Anand Pati Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.
Heard Mr. Anand Pati Tiwari, learned counsel for applicant and learned A.G.A. for State.
Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for applicant in Court today is taken on record.
This application for bail has been filed by applicant Raheesh seeking his enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 468 of 2020, under sections 379, 411 IPC, Police Station- Panki, District Kanpur Nagar during pendency of trial.
Perusal of record shows that in respect of an incident which is alleged to have occurred on 28.9.2020, a prompt F.I.R. dated 4.10.2020 was lodged by first informant Lalit Pal and was registered as Case Crime No. 468 of 2020, under sections 379, 411 IPC, Police Station- Panki, District Kanpur Nagar. In the aforesaid F.I.R. one solitary person has been nominated as unnamed accused.
According to the allegations made in the F.I.R., it is alleged that unknown person has committed theft by taking away motorcycle of first informant.
Pursuant to aforesaid F.I.R., Police proceeded with the statutory investigation of aforesaid case crime number. During course of investigation, Police, on 6.10.2020, arrested five persons and 8 stolen motorcycles were recovered from their joint possession. On the basis of above, five more cases were registered against applicant.
Learned counsel for applicant contends that applicant is innocent. He has been falsely implicated in above mentioned case crime number. Applicant is in jail since 6.10.2020. As such applicant has been under incarceration for more than six months. Applicant is not named in the F.I.R. Recovery is doubtful as there is no independent witness of recovery. Out of six cases, registered against applicant, he has been enlarged on bail in four criminal cases. By means of supplementary affidavit filed today in Court, learned counsel for applicant has brought on record the bail orders of applicant, which have been appended as Annexure-3 to the supplementary affidavit filed today. On the aforesaid premise, it is urged that applicant is liable to be enlarged on bail. It is next submitted that co- accused Rohit Rathour @ Vijay Rathour Arving Rathore @ Kejriwal and Shivam Pal have already been enlarged on bail by this Court. On the aforesaid premise, their bail orders have been brought on record as Annexure-4 to the affidavit. It is thus contended that for the facts and reasons recorded in the bail order of above mentioned co-accused applicant is also liable to be enlarged on bail. Case of present applicant is similar and identical to that of aforesaid co-accused. Therefore, applicant is also liable to be enlarged on bail on the ground of parity. In case applicant is enlarged on bail he shall not misuse the liberty of bail.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. for State has opposed prayer for bail. Apart from raising other issues, the learned A.G.A. could not dispute the factual submissions raised by learned counsel for the applicant.
Keeping in view nature of offence, evidence, complicity of accused, submissions of the learned counsel for parties, and without expressing any opinion on merits of case, I am of the view that applicant has made out a case for bail.
Let the applicant -Raheesh be released on bail in aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned with following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-
(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 :- 8.4.2021 Arshad