Court No. - 69
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 50516 of 2019 Applicant :- Sandeep Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Kaushal Kumar Pandey,Anand Kuamr,Saurabh Gour Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Yashwant Varma,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant; Sri I.P. Srivastava learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in case crime No.381 of 2019, under Sections 302, 201 I.P.C., police station Sardhana, District-Meerut with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.
For the purposes of evaluating the prayer for grant of bail, the Court notes that in the post mortem report cause of death could not be ascertained since the body was in a decomposed state. Although viscera has been preserved and sent for chemical analysis, report is still awaited. Even the DNA examination which was undertaken was inconclusive. The complicity of the applicant rests on the evidence of Sonu and Leelu who assert that they had last seen the deceased in the company of the applicant. Apart from these two statements no other material evidence has been collated to establish the complicity of the applicant in the commission of the crime. Investigation has been completed and a charge sheet submitted. It has been submitted that the applicant who has no previous criminal history and is in jail since 20 May 2019 is entitled to be released on bail. It has next been submitted that in case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.
Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant but could not point out anything material to the contrary.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as also the submissions noticed above, without commenting upon merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
Let the applicant Sandeep 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 not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.
(ii) 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.
(iii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(iv) 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.
(v) 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 :- 29.11.2019 faraz