Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 14688 of 2021 Applicant :- Sarvesh Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Ghan Shyam Das Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.
Heard Mr. Ghayn Shyam Das, learned counsel for applicant and learned A.G.A. for State.
This application for bail has been filed by applicant Sarvesh Kumar, seeking his enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 532 of 2018, under sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B IPC, Police Station Bhongaon, District Mainpuri during pendency of trial.
Perusal of record shows that an F.I.R. dated 9.9.018 was lodged by first informant Anil Kumar Katiyar and was registered as Case Crime No. 532 of 2018, under sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B IPC, Police Station-Bhongaon, District- Mainpuri. In the aforesaid F.I.R. as many as 51 persons have been nominated as named accused.
As per the prosecution story, as unfolded in the F.I.R. it is alleged that named accused persons got their name fraudulently recorded once land which does not belong to them.
Learned counsel fora applicant contends that Applicant is innocent. He has been falsely implicated. Applicant is in jail since 3.2.2021. It is next contended that co-accused Sanjeev Kumar, Ram Das, Rajesh and Om Prabha have been enlarged on bail by this Court. Their bail orders are on record as Annexure-4 to the affidavit. Case of present applicant is similar and identical to that of the above mentioned co-accused. For the facts and reasons recorded in the bail orders of co-accused, applicant is also liable to be enlarged on bail as well as on the ground of parity.
Having heard the learned counsel for applicant and learned A.G.A. for State and upon perusal of the material brought on record as well as the complicity of applicant and without making any comment on the merits of the case, I find that applicant has made out a case for bail. Accordingly bail application is allowed.
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/SHE SHALL NOT SEEK ANY ADJOURNMENT ON THE DATE 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/HER COUNSEL. IN CASE OF HIS/HER ABSENCE, WITHOUT SUFFICIENT CAUSE, THE TRIAL COURT MAY PROCEED AGAINST HIM/HER UNDER SECTION 229-A IPC.
(iii) IN CASE, THE APPLICANT MISUSES THE LIBERTY OF BAIL DURING TRIAL AND IN ORDER TO SECURE HIS/HER PRESENCE PROCLAMATION UNDER SECTION 82 CR.P.C., MAY BE ISSUED AND IF APPLICANT FAILS TO APPEAR BEFORE THE COURT ON THE DATE FIXED IN SUCH PROCLAMATION, THEN, THE TRIAL COURT SHALL INITIATE PROCEEDINGS AGAINST HIM/HER, IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, UNDER SECTION 174-A IPC.
(iv) THE APPLICANT SHALL REMAIN PRESENT, IN PERSON, BEFORE THE TRIAL COURT ON DATES FIXED FOR (1) OPENING OF THE CASE, (2) FRAMING OF CHARGE AND (3) 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 THE HIM/HER IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW.
(v) THE TRIAL COURT MAY MAKE ALL POSSIBLE EFFORTS/ENDEAVOUR AND TRY TO CONCLUDE THE TRIAL WITHIN A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR AFTER THE RELEASE OF THE APPLICANT.
However, it is made clear that any wilful violation of above conditions by the applicant, shall have serious repercussion on his/her bail so granted by this court and the trial court is at liberty to cancel the bail, after recording the reasons for doing so, in the given case of any of the condition mentioned above.
Order Date :- 7.4.2021 Arshad