Court No. - 28
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 15097 of 2019 Applicant :- Raja Ram And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Prabhakar Dubey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.
Heard Mr. Prabhakar Dubey, learned counsel for the applicants and the learned A.G.A. for the State.
This second bail application has been filed by the applicants namely Raja Ram and Smt. Pramila Devi seeking their enlargement on bail in S. T. No. 79 of 2018 (State Vs. Rakesh and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 50 of 2018 under Sections 498A, 304B I.P.C. and Sections 3/4 D. P. Act, P.S.-Mishrauliya, District-Siddharth Nagar during the pendency of the aforesaid trial.
Perused the record.
From the record, it appears that the first bail application of the applicant was rejected by this Court vide order dated 05.02.2019. However subsequently the co-accused-Bikki was enlarged on bail by the Court vide order dated 05.02.2019. Thereafter, the father-in-law and mother-in- law of the deceased namely Ram Das and Chanda were also enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 08.03.2019.
Learned counsel for the applicants has drawn parity regarding the case of the present applicants with the other co-accused who have been enlarged on bail. He submits that since the present applicants are similarly situated with the aforesaid co-accused therefore the present applicants are also entitled to be enlarged on bail.
Per contra, the learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail. He submits that the deceased has died on account of 100% burn injury. However, he could not dispute the factual and legal submission made by the learned counsel for the applicant.
In rejoinder, the learned counsel for the applicants has invited the attention of the Court to the statement of the first informant as recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. to submit that it is the admitted case of the prosecution that the deceased alongwith her husband were residing separately. He therefore submits that the present applicant are liable to be enlarged on bail.
Having heard the learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and upon consideration of the evidence on record as well as the complicity of the applicant but without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I am of the view that the applicants have made out a case for bail. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant is allowed.
Let the applicant-Raja Ram and Smt. Pramila be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing their personal bonds 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 applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they 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 applicants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of their absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under section 229- A I.P.C..
(iii) In case, the applicants misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence proclamation under section 82 Cr.P.C., may be issued and if applicants fail to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against them, in accordance with law, under section 174-A I.P.C.
(iv) The applicants 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 applicants 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 them 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 applicants.
However, it is made clear that any wilful violation of above conditions by the applicants, shall have serious repercussion on their 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 :- 31.5.2019 YK