Court No. - 86
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9446 of 2019 Applicant :- Raju Ahirwar Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- S.K.Mathur,Priyanka Devi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ali Zamin,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No.287/2017, under Section 304 I.P.C., P.S. Bisarakh, District Gautam Budh Nagar.
As per F.I.R. version on 06.05.2017 at about 10:00 a.m. on the point of light off an altercation took place between the deceased Kallu and applicant Raju. It is alleged that applicant Raju beat him by saria by which he became seriously injured and when he was taken to hospital he was declared dead.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has not committed the alleged offence. He has been falsely implicated in the present case. He submits that according to prosecution at the time of alleged incident Faheem and Rajesh were present. In his statement Fahim Khan has stated that he called Rajesh and Rajesh in his statement has stated that he saw the incident. Learned counsel further submits that the incident has occurred all of sudden on the point of light off, there was no intention to cause death. There is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses and, in case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail. It is next contended that there is no previous criminal history of the applicant and is languishing in jail since 12.05.2017.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail prayer of the applicant and submitted that the applicant has committed the alleged offence, therefore, he is not entitled for bail.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and also perusing the material on record, without expressing any opinion on merit of the case, the applicant is entitled for bail, let the applicant- Raju Ahirwar involved in aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions :-
(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he will not tamper with the evidence and will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and will cooperate with the trial. The applicant 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 :- 27.11.2019 Jitendra