Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2019
  6. /
  7. January

Santosh Kumar Bind vs State Of U P

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|29 November, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 69
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8455 of 2018 Applicant :- Santosh Kumar Bind Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Prakash Sharma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Yashwant Varma,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, the learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in Case Crime No. 418 of 2013, under Sections 394,302,201,411 I.P.C., Police Station Sikrara, District Jaunpur with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.
For the purpose of evaluating the prayer for bail, the Court notes that in the FIR as well as in the statement of the informant recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., the allegation in respect of the crime in question was levelled against Nijam and Hanif. The applicant and the other co-accused were not ascribed any role. Subsequently and during the course of investigation, the police proceeded to record a so-called confessional statement of one Amrit Lal who allegedly stated that he had entered the world of crime along with Nakul Ram and the applicant here. In respect of the crime forming subject matter of the present FIR, the role of killing the motorcyclist is ascribed to Nakul Ram. The Court notes that co-accused Nakul Ram and Amrit Lal have already been enlarged on bail in terms of the orders passed on Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 14003 of 2014 and 1023 of 2016. The Court is also apprised that although a charge-sheet has been submitted and cognizance thereof taken on 1 January 2014, the trial according to the learned counsel for the applicant, has not progressed. The applicant has been languishing in Jail since 6 November 2013. The other criminal cases which are alleged to have been foisted upon him and the details of which have been mentioned in paragraph 16 of the present application have come to be registered after the present FIR was lodged and after the applicant was taken into custody.
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 Santosh Kumar Bind 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 LA/-
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Santosh Kumar Bind vs State Of U P

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
29 November, 2019
Judges
  • Yashwant Varma
Advocates
  • Prakash Sharma