Court No. - 48
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 43772 of 2019 Applicant :- Raj Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Ashok Kumar Maurya Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Pritinker Diwaker,J.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant, seeking enlargement on bail during the trial in connection with Crime No.169 of 2018 under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 120-B, 504, 506 of IPC, Police Station Gadwar, District Ballia.
As per prosecution case, by forging an adoption deed of his maternal grandfather, the applicant and his father grabbed some of his property.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that on realization of his mistake, the applicant, immediately, withdrew the case which was filed by him before the Court of Additional Tehsildar, Ballia and now, he has nothing to do with the crime in question. He submits that the applicant is a poor and illiterate man and whatever was done by him, was done as per legal advice given to him. He further submits that there is every chance of amicable settlement between the parties. Lastly, it has been argued that the applicant is in jail since 24.8.2019; trial may take sometime for its final disposal and, therefore, he be released on bail.
On the other hand, learned AGA opposes the bail application.
Considering the totality of the case, in particular the nature of allegations against the applicant, without further commenting on merit, I am inclined to release the applicant on bail.
Let applicant Raj Kumar be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- 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/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 PC, 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 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 PC. 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/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 willful 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 :- 28.11.2019 RKK/-