Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2018
  6. /
  7. January

Sikandar vs State Of U P

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|27 March, 2018
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 55
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 50811 of 2017 Applicant :- Sikandar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Ashwini Kumar,Ganesh Shanker Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the material on record.
By means of this application, the applicant who is involved in case crime no. 417 of 2015, under Sections 302/34 IPC, P.S. Najibabad, District Bijnor is seeking enlargement on bail during the trial.
Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is not named in the FIR. His complicity has figured up in the commission of the crime after six months of the incident. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the case of the present applicant stands on similar footing of co-accused Ayazuddin who has already been enlarged on bail by this Court by order dated 03.07.2017 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 23297 of 2017. He next submitted that co-accused Mohd. Asif alias Bittan who was also enlarged on bail by this Court by order dated 17.08.2017 in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 1712 of 2017. He further submitted that the role of the applicant is identical to that of co-accused- Ayazuddin and Mohd. Asif alias Bittan. He lastly submitted that the applicant who is in jail since 18.11.2015, is also entitled to be enlarged on bail on the ground of parity.
Per contra learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that certain criminal incident of the applicant which has been duly explained in paragraphs 33 and 34 of the affidavit accompanying the bail application but could not dispute the aforementioned facts.
Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned AGA and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for bail on the ground of parity.
In view of the above, let the applicant- Sikandar be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned in case crime no. 417 of 2015, under Sections 302/34 IPC, P.S. Najibabad, District Bijnor with the following conditions:-
(i) THE APPLICANT/APPLICANTS SHALL FILE AN UNDERTAKING TO THE EFFECT THAT THEY 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/APPLICANTS SHALL REMAIN PRESENT BEFORE THE TRIAL COURT ON EACH DATE FIXED, EITHER PERSONALLY OR THROUGH THEIR COUNSEL. IN CASE OF THEIR ABSENCE , WITHOUT SUFFICIENT CAUSE, THE TRIAL COURT MAY PROCEED AGAINST THEM UNDER SECTION 229- A IPC.
(iii) IN CASE, THE APPLICANT/APPLICANTS MISUSE THE LIBERTY OF BAIL DURING TRIAL AND IN ORDER TO SECURE THEIR PRESENCE PROCLAMATION UNDER SECTION 82 CR.P.C., MAY BE ISSUED AND IF APPLICANTS FAIL TO APPEAR BEFORE THE COURT ON THE DATE FIXED IN SUCH PROCLAMATION, THEN, THE TRIAL COURT SHALL INITIATE PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THEM, IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, UNDER SECTION 174-A IPC.
(iv) THE APPLICANT/APPLICANTS 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 APPLICANTS ARE 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 THEM 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 APPLICANTS.
However, it is made clear that any violation of above conditions by the applicant/applicants, shall have serious repercussion on his/her bail so granted by this court and the trial court is at a 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 :- 27.3.2018 Abhishek Sri.
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Sikandar vs State Of U P

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
27 March, 2018
Judges
  • Rahul Chaturvedi
Advocates
  • Ashwini Kumar Ganesh Shanker Srivastava