Court No. - 24
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3331 of 2018 Applicant :- Satish Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Dhirendra Kumar Srivastava,Rajiv Sisodia Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Mahboob Ali,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
This bail application has been preferred by the accused- applicant, Satish Kumar, who is involved in Case Crime No.433 of 2017, under Sections 25, 30, 27 of Arms Act, Police Station Pakbada, District Moradabad.
It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant has been falsely implicated in this case on the basis of suspicion and there were two groups of students scuffling with each other in the campus of the University. It is next submitted that a licensed DBBL gun is alleged to have been recovered from the applicant. Further, it is submitted that applicant has been granted bail in the main case under Section 307 I.P.C. etc. by another Bench of this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.3193 of 2018 vide order dated 30.01.2018. It has also been submitted that co-accused Ravindra Kumar has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 12.02.2018 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.4969 of 2018 and thus, applicant is also entitled for bail. Lastly, it is submitted that applicant has no criminal history and he has been languishing in jail since 11.12.2017, and he undertakes not to misuse the liberty of bail, if granted.
Learned A.G.A opposed the prayer for bail.
Considering the facts of the case and keeping in mind the nature of accusations, the nature of evidence in support thereof, the severity of punishment which conviction will entail, the character of the accused-applicant, circumstances which are peculiar to the accused, reasonable possibility of securing the presence of the accused at the trial, reasonable apprehension of the witnesses being tampered with, the larger interest of the public/ State and other circumstances, but without expressing any opinion on the merits, I am of the view that it is a fit case for grant of bail.
Let the applicant, Satish Kumar be released on bail in Case Crime No.433 of 2017, under Sections 25, 30, 27 of Arms Act, Police Station Pakbada, District Moradabad on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in 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 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;
(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 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 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.
Order Date :- 27.2.2018 Radhika