Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 23797 of 2019 Applicant :- Raj Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Nasiruzzaman, Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.
Vakalatnama filed by Sri Akhilesh Srivastava and Sri Manoj Kumar Srivastava, learned counsels appearing on behalf of the informant today in the Court is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the informant as well as learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.
By means of this application, the applicant who is involved in case crime no.726 of 2018, under Section 498A, 302, 120B IPC, Police Station-Tappal, District-Aligarh is seeking enlargement on bail during the trial.
Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that this unfortunate incident took place after nine years of the marriage. The applicant is named in the FIR. Though, the place of occurrence is the residence of the applicant but general role of assault has been roped against all the applicants. A perusal of the post mortem examination report shows that there was a contusion over right costal margin over area about 12 X 10 c.m. with deformed/dispersed right costal margin with fracture of four ribs on the right side of the deceased. There was a consistent demand of Rs.two lacs and a swift car and the beneficiary of the said additional dowry at best could be the husband. The applicant is the father-in-law(mamia sasur) of the deceased. The applicant is languishing in jail since 31.01.2019, having no criminal antecedents to his credit.
Learned A.G.A as well as learned counsel for the informant opposed the prayer for bail.
Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail.
2018, under Section 498A, 302, 120B IPC, Police Station- Tappal, District-Aligarh be released on bail 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 WOULD FULLY COOPERATE IN THE CONCLUSION OF TRIAL WITHIN ONE YEAR AND ANY TEMPERING OR WILLING TACTICS ON THE PART OF THE APPLICANT TO DELAY THE TRIAL WOULD WARRANT THE AUTOMATIC CANCELLATION OF BAIL.
(ii) 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.
(iii) 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 IPC.
(iv) 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 IPC.
(v) 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.
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.
Order Date :- 10.6.2019 Sumit S