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

Sonu @ Surendra vs State Of U P And Anr

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|31 July, 2018
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 59
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1776 of 2018 Appellant :- Sonu @ Surendra Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Anr.
Counsel for Appellant :- Kuldeep Kumar Sharma Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Suneet Kumar,J.
Heard learned counsel for the appellant-applicant, the learned A.G.A. and perused the record.
This criminal appeal under Section 14A(2) of Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 has been filed against the order dated 12.03.2018 passed by the Additional Session Judge/Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Baghpat, in Bail Application No. 05 of 2018(Sonu @ Surendra Vs. State of U.P.), arising out of Case Crime No. 1064 of 2017, under Sections 302, 452, 504, 506, 34 I.P.C. and Section 3(2)(5) of S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station- Baghpat, District Baghpat, seeking bail in the aforesaid sections.
As per prosecution case, the deceased had some altercation with the co- accused Bablu in the sugar cane field; in the evening, Bablu alongwith the appellant-applicant has come to the house of the deceased; Bablu had caused fire arm injuries to the deceased who succumbed to his injuries; role of causing firearm injury has been assigned to the co-accused Bablu; allegation against the appellant-applicant is that he was present on the spot of incident; no recovery has been made from the appellant-applicant; there is no evidence to link the appellant-applicant with the alleged offence. The criminal antecedent of the appellant-applicant has been explained; he is in jail since 22.11.2017.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail, but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the appellant-applicant.
Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that the bail application filed before the court below deserves to allowed.
Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and order dated 12.03.2018 passed by the Additional Session Judge/Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Baghpat, in Bail Application No. 05 of 2018 is hereby set aside.
Let the appellant-applicant Sonu @ Surendra 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 subject to following additional conditions, which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-
(i) The appellant-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 appellant-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 appellant-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 appellant 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 appellant-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 appellant-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, It is made clear that in case the appellant-applicant indulges in intimidating or threatening any witness, the State or Prosecutor would be at liberty to file an application for cancellation of bail.
Order Date :- 31.7.2018 VKG
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

Sonu @ Surendra vs State Of U P And Anr

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
31 July, 2018
Judges
  • Suneet Kumar
Advocates
  • Kuldeep Kumar Sharma