Court No. - 42
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 52241 of 2019 Applicant :- Satish Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Rajesh Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Chandra Dhari Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for applicant, learned A.G.A. and perused the record.
This bail application has been preferred by the accused-applicant, Satish, who is involved in Case Crime No. 484 of 2019, under Sections 304 & 34 I.P.C., P.S.- Jewar, District- Gautam Budh Nagar.
Learned counsel for the applicant in support of his prayer for bail submits that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that after completion of investigation charge sheet in the present case has been filed on 10.11.2019. It is further submitted that after getting the B. Tech. Degree from I.I.T., Bombay, the applicant was selected and appointed in N.T.P.C. on the post of D.G.M. The deceased was friend of the applicant. It is further submitted that initially the F.I.R. was lodged for commission of offence under Section 308 I.P.C. against four persons and after investigation and death of deceased the F.I.R. was converted from 308 I.P.C. to 304 I.P.C. Learned counsel for the applicant further pointed out the statement of one Yameen, waiter of the restaurant who has stated that the deceased and all the named accused in the F.I.R. were good friends, they used to visit the restaurant on each week days and were used to consume liquor and thereafter used to take dinner. He also stated that on the date of incident, they all were present at the restaurant and had consumed liquor and also taken dinner and thereafter, left the restaurant with the cordial mood. He further stated that he did not see them disputing or quarreling with each other. Learned counsel for the applicant further submitted that CCTV footage is also on record and stated in paragraph no. 20 of the bail application that as per CCTV Footage on that very date the applicants named in the F.I.R. were present with I-20 Car in the CCTV Footage of Hospital and brother of deceased namely Dharmendra was also present in Kailash Hospital and endorsing the CCTV Footage, the Investigating Officer claims to have recorded in the parcha of the case diary by stating that:-
^^lhlhVhoh dSejs ds QqVst dks fudyokdj voyksdu fd;k x;k rks esu ykSch esa fjdkMZ dh x;h QqVst ds voyksdu ls Li"V gksrk gS fd le; 00-40-15 cts nhid dks vkbZ 20 dkj ls ysdj equsUnz o lrh'k dSyk'k vLirky tsoj igaqps o le; 01-11-00 cts jfoUnz iq= fouksn o dqynhi o et#c nhid dk HkkbZ /keZsUnz dSyk'k vLirky igaqps o le; 02-08-40 cts dSyk'k vLirky ls nhid dks ckgj ys x;sA lh0 lh0 Vh0 oh0 QqVst dh lh0 Mh0 cuokdj layXu fd;k tkrk gSA^^ It is also submitted that present applicant has admitted the deceased in the hospital and made his best efforts to save his life. The applicant has no previous criminal history which has been explained in para-27 of the bail application, he is not likely to abscond. The applicant is in jail since 22.08.2019.
Learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of State- respondent vehemently opposed the bail application but not contradicted the aforesaid submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant.
In view of the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made by learned counsel for both sides and going through the, F.I.R., statement of the witness recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. and other relevant material available on record, without commenting on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail.
Let applicant, Satish, 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 with 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, if 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 :- 27.11.2019 AKT