Court No. - 78
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 30324 of 2019 Applicant :- Shibbo @ Shiv Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Vikrant Gupta,Moeez Uddin Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
Sri Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, Advocate, has filed his Power on behalf of informant, which is taken on record.
Heard Sri Vikrant Gupta, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, learned counsel for the informant, Sri Madnesh Prasad Singh, learned counsel for the State and perused the record of the present bail application.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant- Shibbo @ Shiv Singh with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No.132 of 2019, under Sections 307, 323 and 504 I.P.C., Police Station- Govind Nagar, District- Mathura, during the pendency of the trial.
It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the present first information report has been lodged by Mahesh Singh Tomar on 8th April, 2019 against Naran, Shibbo (applicant herein) and Smt. Shyamwati alleging therein that on 7th April, 2019 at 08:00 p.m. as soon as three sons of the informant, namely, Kamal Singh, Mohan Singh and Lakhendra Singh reached the barber shop of one Raju for their haircut, two accused persons, namely, Naran and Shibbo (applicant), who were already present there, started abusing them, when his sons objected not to do the same, co-accused Shibbo instigated to beat them, then the other co-accused Shaymwati also reached there and she told to beat them. On hearing the said noise, the informant also reached there, then all the accused persons attacked on them by scissor and knife due to which they sustained injuries. It has further been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that it is a cross case. The real fact is that earlier there was quarrel between the informant's side and applicant's side due to a petty dispute regarding playing of Holi. For the said quarrel, both the parties have kept enmity to each other and on the aforesaid date of incident, a quarrel took place between the parties in which persons from both sides have sustained injuries for which a first information report has also been lodged by the co-accused Shyamwati against the informant and his three sons, a copy of which is enclosed as Annexure-9 to the affidavit accompanying the present bail application. Apart from the above, it is next argued that general role of causing injuries to the injured has been assigned to all the accused persons. No specific role has been assigned to any of the accused persons. Learned counsel for the applicant has then argued that it is a cross case and who, out of the two rival groups, is the aggressor, cannot be determined at this stage. Co- accused Naran, having identical role, has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 16.07.2019 passed in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No.28227 of 2019. Accordingly, the applicant is also entitled for bail on the ground of parity. The applicant has no criminal antecedents to his credit except the present one. It is next contended that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses and in case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail. The applicant is in jail since 8th April, 2019. Accordingly, he requests for bail.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. and the learned counsel for the informant have opposed the bail prayer of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, he does not deserve any indulgence. In case the applicant is released on bail he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail. However, the learned A.G.A. and the learned counsel for the informant could not dispute the factual submissions as urged by the learned counsel for the applicant.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh vs. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22, without expressing any opinion on merit of the case, let the applicant involved in aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of 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 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 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 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.
(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 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 :- 30.7.2019 Anand Sri./-