Heard learned counsel for applicant, learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the complainant and perused the record.
This bail application has been preferred by the accused-applicant ,Ram Darash Mallah, who is involved in Case Crime No.06 of 2011, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 302, 395, 436, 504, 506, 336, 427, 353, 332 I.P and 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act, and section 3/4 Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act and Section 3(2) 5 SC/ST Act, P.S. Jamaniya, District- Ghazipur.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. According to him co-accused Lalu Mallah alias chhathu, Vinod Bind, Nirmala Mallah, Sonu Teli, Raj Kumar Bind and Rajesh Kumar Bind and another and Ram Ashish Yadav and Jaggu Mallah having similar role have been granted bail by this Court vide orders dated 20.7.2016 in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 23834 of 2016, order dated 4.4.2016 in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 9234 of 2016, order dated 21.1.2014 in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 21015 of 2013, order dated 21.1.2014 in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No.7476 of 2012, order dated 21.1.2014 in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No.21536 of 2013, order dated 21.1.2014 in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 9279 of 2013 and order dated 28.3.2014 in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 6496 of 2014 and the case of the applicant stands on identical footing, hence the applicant is also entitled for bail on the ground of parity. He further submits that the applicant is aged person and he has no previous history. He has permanent residence. He is not likely to abscond.
On behalf of State the prayer for bail has been opposed.
In view of the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made by learned counsel for both sides and going through the record, without commenting on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail.
Let applicant, Ram Darash Mallah, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:
(i). The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence, if 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 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 default of this condition is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 9.8.2016 G.S