Court No. - 78
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 28913 of 2019 Applicant :- Sonu @ Chandra Shekhar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rohit Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ashish Kumar Gupta
Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
Heard Sri Rohit Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Lalji Maurya, learned counsel for the State and Mr. Ashish Kumar Gupta, learned counsel for the complainant as well as perused the material on record.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant-Sonu @ Chandra Shekhar with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 190 of 2019, under Sections 323, 504, 506, 336 and 307 I.P.C., Police Station-Raya, District-Mathura, during the pendency of the trial.
It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that a first information report has been lodged by Nepal Singh against as many as four named accused persons including the present applicant alleging therein that on 6th June, 2019 at night, when the informant was sleeping on cot on his plot, at 10:30 p.m. his neighbours i.e. all the accused persons after surrounding the stray animals were taken around the plot of the informant, when the informant objected not to do the same, on which they started using filthy language against the informant and thereafter they climbed on their roof and from where they started pelting stones upon the informant and then with the intention to kill him, they fired upon him by illegal pistols, but he was saved and unfortunately some parts of bullet hit one Jai Devi, who was sleeping on her roof adjacent to the roof of informant due to which she sustained injuries. It has further been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that due to petty dispute, as is evident from the first information report, a sudden quarrel took place between the informant's side and applicant side' in which injuries have been sustained by Jai Devi. The said injuries sustained by her are only because of sudden quarrel and nothing else. There is no motive or intention to cause injuries to Jai Devi. It has further been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that general role of causing injuries to the injured has been assigned to all the accused persons. No specific role as to who is the author of the said injuries has not been assigned to any of the accused persons. Till date no statement of the injured has been recorded. There is no independent or public witness from which it is established that the applicant is involved in the commission of the alleged offence. 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 9th June, 2019.
Per contra learned A.G.A. has 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 deserves 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, learned A.G.A.could not dispute the factual submissions as urged by the learned counsel for the applicant.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and the material on record as well as the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. & Another reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 and 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.
(Manju Rani Chauhan, J.) Order Date :- 30.7.2019 Sushil/-