Court No. - 1
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 29117 of 2015 Applicant :- Shrikant Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Awadhesh Singh,Sushil Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate,Lokesh Kumar Dwivedi
Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J.
Learned counsel for the applicant has filed a rejoinder affidavit today in Court, which is taken on record.
Heard Sri Sudhir Kumar Agrawal and Sri Sushil Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Lokesh Kumar Dwivedi, learned counsel for the complainant, Sri G.P.Singh, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State and perused the record.
It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that the case is rest on circumstantial evidence. Except the extra judicial confession, there is no evidence against the applicant to connect him with crime in question. He next argued that the co-accused persons, namely, Mohit and Sachin from whom certain recoveries were made, have already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 21.1.2015 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos.9296 of 2015 & 21794 of 2015 by Coordinate Bench of this Court vide orders dated 13.7.2017 and 29.11.2017, copies of which have been annexed as Annexure RA-2 to the rejoinder affidavit and so far as the applicant is concerned, clothes of the deceased were recovered, hence, the case of the applicant stands on identical footing to those of the co-accused who have been granted bail, hence the applicant is also entitled for bail on the ground of parity. The criminal history of the applicant has been explained in paragraph no.5 of the rejoinder affidavit. The applicant is in jail since 7.10.2014.
Learned counsel for the complainant as well as learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid fact as argued by learned counsel for the applicant.
Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tampering of the witnesses and prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case.
Let the applicant-Shrikant involved in Case Crime No.840 of 2014, under Sections 364, 302, 201 & 120-B I.P.C., Police Station New Mandi, District Muzaffar Nagar be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs.one lac with two sureties (one should be of his family members) each in 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 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.
However, the trial court is directed to expedite the trial of the present case and conclude the same expeditiously preferably within a period of six months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order, if there is no legal impediment.
Order Date :- 26.10.2018 NS