Court No. - 72
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 16861 of 2021 Applicant :- Sandeep Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Parmeshwar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ashish Pandey
Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate representing the State; Shri Ashish Pandey, learned counsel appearing on behalf of informant and perused the record of the case.
The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 176 of 2020, under Sections 302, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station-Ghughali, District-Maharajganj during the pendency of trial.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that as per F.I.R. dated 09.09.2021, general role of causing injury to the deceased has been assigned to four accused persons, namely, Sandeep, Santosh, Golu and Ravinder by lathi, danda and iron rod, but in the postmortem report of the deceased only one injury has been found on his head. It is next submitted that one Jai Hind is stated to be an eye witness of the incident who has assigned the specific role of causing injury to deceased to co- accused Golu @ Narbadeshwar by iron rod. On the strength of aforesaid submissions it is submitted that the applicant is not the author of the said injury by which deceased died. Applicant has no criminal history and he is languishing in jail since 09.09.2020. Lastly it is submitted that if the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the early disposal of the case.
Per contra learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the informant have opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant, but they do not dispute the aforesaid factual aspects of the case as argued on behalf of applicant.
After having heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A., I find that in the F.I.R. general role of causing injury to the deceased has been assigned to all the accused persons including the applicant, but later on eye witness Jai Hind has specified the main role of causing injury to the deceased to Golu @ Narbadeshwar. I also find that deceased had received only one injury on his head, therefore, case of present applicant is distinguishable from the case of co-accused Golu @ Narbadeshwar. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a fit case for bail. Hence, the bail application is hereby allowed.
Let the applicant Sandeep be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two 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 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.
(v) The applicant shall file computer generated copy of this order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.
(vi) The computer generated copy of this order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.
(vii) The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.
It is clarified that anything said in this order is limited to the purpose of determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. The trial court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led unaffected by anything said in this order.
Order Date :- 29.7.2021 Sunil Kr. Gupta Digitally signed by Justice Sanjay Kumar Singh Date: 2021.07.29 16:22:20 IST Reason: Document Owner Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad