Court No. - 67
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 5721 of 2019 Appellant :- Rohit Solanki @ Param And Another Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Narendra Singh Chahar Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Deepak Kumar Kulshrestha
Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.
Counter affidavit filed by learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 today in the Court is taken on record.
Heard N.S.Chahar, learned counsel for the appellants, Sri D.K.Kulshrestha, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 as well as learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.
This criminal appeal under Section 14 A (2) of Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (in short "S.C./S.T. Act") has been filed for setting-aside the bail rejection order dated 05.07.2019 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Agra in Bail Application No.4058 of 2019 arising out of case crime no.26 of 2019 under Sections 302, 201, 120B IPC and Section 3(2)(V) of SC/ST Act, Police Station- Malpura, District-Agra.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicants/appellants that through 156(3) Cr.P.C. application the FIR was got registered by one Nahar Singh. This FIR was came into existence after almost three months from the date of incident. The applicants is not named in the FIR. Name of the applicants figure up in the confessional statement of the accused Kapil, who in his statement have stated that the applicants and other co-accused hatched the conspiracy for eliminating the deceased. There is no other evidence for implicating the applicant in committing the offence. Besides this there is recovery of small piece of "Danda" at the joint pointing out of Prashant, Manish and Rohit from the barren WELL. Except this there is no direct evidence implicating the applicant in commission of the offence. It is contended by the counsel that the entire prosecution story hinges the broken links of the circumstantial evidence and on the confession statement of the co-accused. There is no ocular testimony in this case showing the complicity of the applicants in commission of the offence. The applicants are languishing in jail since 09.06.2019 having no criminal antecedent to their credit.
Learned A.G.A as well as learned counsel for the complainant opposed the prayer for bail.
The submission made by learned counsel for the applicants, prima facie, is quite appealing and convincing for the purpose of bail only.
Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, 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 applicants-Rohit Solanki @ Param and Manish Solanki be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on their furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-
(i) THE APPLICANTS WOULD FULLY COOPERATE IN THE CONCLUSION OF TRIAL WITHIN ONE YEAR AND ANY TEMPERING OR WILLING TACTICS ON THE PART OF THE APPLICANT TO DELAY THE TRIAL WOULD WARRANT THE AUTOMATIC CANCELLATION OF BAIL.
(ii) THE APPLICANTS SHALL FILE AN UNDERTAKING TO THE EFFECT THAT HE SHALL NOT SEEK ANY ADJOURNMENT ON THE DATE 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.
(iii) THE APPLICANTS 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 IPC.
(iv) IN CASE, THE APPLICANTS MISUSE THE LIBERTY OF BAIL DURING TRIAL AND IN ORDER TO SECURE HIS PRESENCE PROCLAMATION UNDER SECTION 82 CR.P.C., MAY BE ISSUED AND IF 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 IPC.
(v) THE APPLICANTS SHALL REMAIN PRESENT, IN PERSON, BEFORE THE TRIAL COURT ON DATES FIXED FOR (1) OPENING OF THE CASE, (2) FRAMING OF CHARGE AND (3) 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 any wilful violation of above conditions by the applicants, shall have serious repercussion on his bail so granted by this court.
Accordingly, the appeal succeeds and the same stands allowed. Impugned order dated 05.07.2019 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Agra, is hereby set aside.
Order Date :- 27.11.2019 Abhishek Sri.