Court No. - 55
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 24878 of 2018 Applicant :- Ranjeet Singh Alias Bablu Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Rajiv Lochan Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ashok Kumar Rai
Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.
Heard Sri Rajiv Lochan Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Ashok Kumar Rai, learned counsel for the complainant and learned A.G.A. appearing for the State.
It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is brother-in-law (Nandoi) of the victim is living separately and having no concern either with the alleged demand of dowry or her mal treatment. He further submitted that the husband of the victim has already been enlarged on bail by another Bench of this Court vide order dated 13.09.2017 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.33250 of 2017. He next submitted that the passport of the applicant has been seized by the Government of India and there is no chance of fleeing away from the country. As the husband of the victim has already been enlarged on bail, hence it would be appropriate for this Court to enlarge the applicant on bail on furnishing heavy sureties with the satisfaction of the Court concerned. The applicant undertakes to appear before the trial court on each and every date fixed by the trial court. The applicant is in jail since 26.03.2018.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but he could not dispute the above mentioned submission advanced by the counsel for the applicant.
Considering the nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tempering of the witnesses and prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case.
Let the applicant Ranjeet Singh alias Bablu involved in Case Crime No.141 of 2003, under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506, 406 and 316 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Shamli, District Shamli be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two heavy sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following condition:-
(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, the trial Court is directed to expedite the trial of the aforesaid case and conclude the same within preferably a period of six months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order, if there is no legal impediment.
Order Date :- 23.8.2018 SFH