Court No. - 42
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 22088 of 2019 Applicant :- Sandeep Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Shashi Prakash Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
Heard Mr. Shashi Prakash Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Om Prakash Mishra, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the material on record.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant- Sandeep with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 1748 of 2018, under Sections 302, 201, 404 and 411 I.P.C., Police Station-Kotwali Dehat, District-Bulandshahr, during the pendency of the trial.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the F.I.R. of the alleged incident was lodged by Vikash Kumar, the brother of the deceased, on 28.11.2018 at 20:41 hours against Amit, Sujeet and Lakhan. In the first information report it has been mentioned that on 27.11.2018 at 9.00 p.m. the deceased Sunil and his maternal uncle Sanjay had gone at tube-well for irrigation where Amit, Sujeet and Lakhan were present. They took away the deceased in a van ( vehicle ). Thereafter the dead body of the deceased was found in a sugar cane field of one Naththu Lal Sharma. During investigation the I.O. recorded the statements of Harvir and Deshraj under Section 161 Cr.P.C. The applicant is not named in the F.I.R. In the statement of the Deshraj, the name of the applicant has surfaced, wherein it has been stated that the applicant due to being insulted by the deceased had instigated the accused persons to murder the deceased. Thereafter, on 2.1.2019 the applicant and the co- accused Peetam Singh @ Pappi were arrested by the police. On interrogation they confessed their guilt and on the joint pointing out of the applicant and the co-accused Peetam Singh @ Papp the motorcycle along with a blood stained angochha which was tied with the handle of the said motorcycle was recovered from the sugar cane field. It has been further submitted that recovery has been shown after two months of the alleged incident. In fact false recovery has been planted against the applicant. The applicant and deceased are real brothers. The applicant has no concern with the alleged offence and there was no illicit relation with the wife of the co-accused Peetam Singh @ Papp and the deceased. The applicant has not committed the alleged offence. There is no direct evidence against the applicant except the confessional statements of the applicant and the co-accused. It is further submitted that the co-accused, namely, Peetam Singh @ Pappi has already been enlarged on bail by the another Bench of this Court vide order dated 19th April, 2019 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 14132 of 2019. The case of the present applicant is similar and identical to that of the aforesaid co-accused. As such the present applicant is also liable to be enlarged on bail. The applicant has no criminal antecedents to his credit except the present one. It is next contended that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses and in case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail. The applicant is in jail since 2nd January, 2019.
Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, he does not deserves any indulgence. In case the applicant is released on bail he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail. However, the learned A.G.A. could not dispute the factual submissions as urged by the learned counsel for the applicant.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and the material on record as well as the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. & Another reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 and without expressing any opinion on merit of the case, 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.
(Manju Rani Chauhan, J.) Order Date :- 3.6.2019 Sushil/-