Court No. - 78
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 30405 of 2019 Applicant :- Subham Yadav @ Ashu Yadav Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Pradeep Kumar Tiwari,Ajay Kumar Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of the applicant in Court today is taken on record.
Heard Mr. Pradeep Kumar Tiwari and Mr. Ajay Kumar Shukla, learned counsels for the applicant and Mr. Prashant Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the material on record.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant- Subham Yadav @ Ashu Yadav with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 342 of 2019, under Section 307 I.P.C., Police Station-Meja, District-Prayagraj, during the pendency of the trial.
It is argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case due to ulterior motive. It is argued that as per the allegations made in the first information report, the brother of the informant, namely, Ramkant Seth @ Rinku had a jewellery shop at Sirsa, Police Station Meja, District-Prayagraj. On 22nd April, 2019 when the brother of the applicant after closing his shop, was returning to his house at Patel Nagar, on the way two-three persons, who hid their faces by helmet, after chasing his brother by motor-cycle fired upon him due to which he sustained injuries and fell on the earth, due to darkness he has not recognized the said persons. It has further been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is neither named in the FIR nor his name surfaced in the statement of the injured. His name has surfaced on the information of a Police Informer after one month and eight days from the date of alleged incident, after that he has been arrested and after exerting pressure upon him, the Police has taken confessional statement of the applicant. In view of Sections 25 and 26 of the Indian Evidence Act, the confessional statement, which has been recorded before the Police, cannot be accepted as the same has no evidentiary value. Except the aforesaid, there is no evidence on record from which it is established that the applicant is involved in the commission of alleged offence. It is next argued that the co-accused-Akhilesh Yadav @ Lala, who has also not been named in the F.I.R., has already been enlarged on bail by this Bench vide order dated 9th July, 2019 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 26661 of 2019. The case of the applicant is similar and identical to that of the aforesaid co-accused. As such the present applicant is also liable to be enlarged on bail. 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 30th May, 2019.
Per contra, the 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, the learned A.G.A. could not dispute the factual submissions as urged by the learned counsel for the applicant.
Considering the material/evidence brought on record, the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties 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 , 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/-