Court No. - 64
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 38786 of 2021 Applicant :- Sanjesh Yadav @ Sanjay Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Sunil Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ajit Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the entire record.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in Case Crime No. 375 of 2021, under Sections 392, 342, 411 IPC, Police Station - Kotwali, District - Etah with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail.
The FIR of this incident was lodged on 13.05.2021 against an unknown person. It was alleged in the FIR by the complainant Balveer Singh, Assistant Development Officer, that two persons pushed him into their vehicle and they took him on Murkuti Road and 100 Mtrs. ahead to it they stopped the vehicle. Thereafter the accused persons went away towards Etah District after snatching the complainant's purse, I. Card, Aadhar Card, Pan Card, licence, two Samsung phones etc. During the investigation name of the present accused and other co-accused have surfaced.
The contention as raised at the Bar by learned counsel for the applicant is that applicant-accused is quite innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the present accused was not named in the FIR. It is argued that they were arrested in a false case of attacking and firing on the police party in which no police members were injured and then, the accused persons were falsely roped in the present case just to show that the police had succeeded to unearth the old case of snatching which allegedly had occurred on 02.05.2021. It is further submitted that co-accused of this case namely Jeetu Yadav had already been released on bail by another Bench of this Court, vide order dated 16.08.2021, in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 29216 of 2021, a copy of which submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record. On the basis of the bail order granted in favour of co-accused the learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is also entitled to bail on the ground parity with accused Jeetu Yadav who has already been released on bail; the role assigned to the present accused was similar and identical to the role assigned to accused Jeetu Yadav and the offence is triable by the court of magistrate. Lastly, it is argued that the applicant is in jail since 14.05.2021 and that in case applicant is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail. But he accepts the bail parity of the present applicant with co-accused.
Keeping in view the submission of learned counsel for the parties, period of detention of the applicant, considering the plea of bail parity with co- accused, considering that the offence is triable by the court of magistrate and considering all other attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, at this stage, prima facie, a case for bail has been made out.
The prayer for bail is granted. The application is allowed.
Let applicant Sanjesh Yadav @ Sanjay involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties to the satisfaction of court concerned subject to the following conditions:-
(1). The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence and 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;
(2). 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;
(3). In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail 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 may initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(4). 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 default of this condition is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.
The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by the learned counsel for the applicant alongwith a self attested identity proof of the said persons (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number (s) to which the said Aadhar Card is linked before the concerned Court/Authority/Official.
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.
Order Date :- 25.10.2021 LBY