Court No. - 1
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 16086 of 2019 Applicant :- Raj Bahadur Opposite Party :- C.B.I.
Counsel for Applicant :- Alok Kumar Mishra,Shyam Singh Somvanshi Counsel for Opposite Party :- Gyan Prakash
Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J.
Heard Sri Shyam Singh Somvanshi, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Gyan Prakash, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Sanjay Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for CBI, and perused the record.
It appears from orders dated 18.04.2019 and 09.05.2019 that learned counsel for CBI was given time to file counter affidavit in the matter but today also he states that no one has turned up to file any counter affidavit. Hence, the Court proceeds to hear the matter.
It has been contended by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is not named in the FIR and his name has come into light during the course of investigation. Co-accused Dinesh has already been granted bail by a Division Bench of this Court on 30.04.2019 in Criminal Misc. II Bail Application No.7132 of 2019 and the matter is still under investigation by CBI which will take more time. The applicant has no other reported criminal antecedent and he is in jail since 2.6.2016.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail.
Bail order of the aforesaid co-accused has been produced by the learned counsel for the applicant. The same is taken on record.
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 Raj Bahadur involved in Case Crime No. 242 of 2016 under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 307, 323, 333, 336, 436, 353, 186, 188, 427, 120-B and 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act, Police Station Sadar Bazar, District Mathura be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 1,00,000/- with two sureties (one should be of his family member) 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 :- 30.5.2019 Madhurima