Court No. - 78
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 30350 of 2019 Applicant :- Ravendra Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Ajay Kumar Vashistha Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
Sri Vipin Kumar, Advocate, has filed his Vakalatnama on behalf of complainant, which is taken on record.
Heard Sri Ajay Kumar Vashistha, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Vipin Kumar, learned counsel for the complainant, Sri Madnesh Prasad Singh, learned counsel for the State and perused the record of the present bail application.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant – Ravendra with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No.53 of 2019, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 323 I.P.C., Police Station Sikandarpur Vaishya, District Kasganj.
It is argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case due to ulterior motive. It is next argued that with regard to some agricultural land there was a sudden quarrel between the parties, due to which as many as six persons have assaulted the people from the informant's side in which four persons have sustained injuries. In the statement of the injured, the role of causing grievous injuries on one of the injured has been assigned to co-accused Jugendra. The role of the applicant is distinguishable from that of co-accused Jugendra. It is next contended that the applicant has no criminal history and there is no possibility of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses and in case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and he is languishing in jail since 08.05.2019. Accordingly, he requests for bail.
Learned counsel for the complainant as well as learned counsel for the State vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.
Considering the material/evidence brought on record as well as submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh vs. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22, let the applicant 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 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 :- 30.7.2019 Anand Sri./-