Heard learned counsel for the accused-applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and perused the material available on record.
The present bail application has been filed by the accused-applicant who is involved in Case Crime No.67 of 2018, under Sections 396, 412, 34 IPC, Police Station Malihabad, District Lucknow.
The occasion of present bail application has arisen on rejection of the bail plea of the accused-applicant by Addl. Sessions Judge, Lucknow vide order dated 28.8.2019.
Learned counsel for the bail-applicant stresses on the point that accused-applicant is languishing in jail since 3.2.2018 for no fault by him. On bare perusal of the First Information Report, coupled with the recovery memo, made annexure in the bail application, learned counsel for the bail-applicant submits that the accused-applicant is not named in the FIR and even no role has been assigned to him in the offence or with regard to recovery of any incriminating articles with his possession or custody. Only facts whereupon the police has implicated the accused-applicant is the extra-judicial confession of one of the co-accused, namely, Vinod. The co-accused-Vinod in his confessional statement has named the present accused-applicant as well as various persons for committing the offence. No incriminating evidence or articles have been recovered from the possession of the accused-applicant.
Learned counsel for the bail-applicant submits the offence, if any, constituted under Section 412 IPC, is also on the basis of confessional statement of the co-accused, despite the fact that nothing has been recovered from the possession of the accused-applicant. Learned counsel, on the basis of aforesaid facts, as stated above, submits that the accused-applicant should be released on bail enable him to make proper defence and to participate in the trial fairly.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the other co-accused namely Kishan @ Raju @ Rakesh @ Kaliya, who has also been assigned the same role, has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 23.9.2019 passed in Bail No.9108 of 2019.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the bail application but could not dispute the argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant.
Considering the rival submissions of learned counsel for the parties, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusation, complicity of the accused-applicant, gravity of the offence and the severity of punishment in case of conviction as well as period for which he is in jail, I find force in the argument of learned counsel for the accused-applicant. The accused-applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.
Let applicant-Ramesh @ Raju 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 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.
Order Date :- 18.12.2019 Gautam