Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2018
  6. /
  7. January

Raju vs State Of U P

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|31 July, 2018
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 59
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 28605 of 2018 Applicant :- Raju Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- V.K.S. Somvanshi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Suneet Kumar,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, the learned A.G.A. and perused the record.
This bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant involved in Case Crime No. 173 of 2018, under Sections 304, I.P.C., P.S. Rasoolabad, District Kanpur Dehat.
It is urged that applicant is named in the F.I.R. along with three accused persons; general allegation of assaulting the deceased by blunt object has been levelled against all the accused persons; as per postmortem report, the injury received by the deceased on his head proved to be fatal and cause of death. The author of the said injury is not known. The applicant is languishing in jail since 12.01.2018, having no criminal history and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.
It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is named in the F.I.R. along with three accused persons; as per prosecution case the son of the informant was beaten up with iron rod and kulhadi by four accused persons including the applicants. Subsequently the deceased succumbed injuries. The Incident is of 26.03.2018. The post mortem examination was done on 05.04.2018 and the FIR was lodged on 07.04.2011. The name of all the other accused persons have been brought during the course of investigation; no recovery of the alleged weapon has been made from the applicant. There is no other evidence against the applicant to link him in the present offence. The applicant has been implicated on a false case, which is after thought. The applicant has no criminal history. He is in jail since 09.04.2008.
Learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.
Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, 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.
Let the applicant- Raju be released on bail in the above case on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Court concerned subject to following additional conditions, which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-
(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. However, It is made clear that in case the applicant indulges in intimidating or threatening any witness, the State or Prosecutor would be at liberty to file an application for cancellation of bail.
Order Date :- 31.7.2018 VKG
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Raju vs State Of U P

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
31 July, 2018
Judges
  • Suneet Kumar
Advocates
  • V K S Somvanshi