Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned AGA for the State and perused the material available on record.
This appeal has been preferred under Section 14 (A) (2) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, against the impugned order dated 14.1.2019 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge-II/Special Court SC/ST Act, District Lucknow in Bail Application No. 181 of 2019, arising out of Case Crime No. 371 of 2018, under Section 147, 452, 504, 308, 304 IPC and Section 3(2) V SC/ST Act, Police Station Bajarkhaala, District Lucknow. The Presiding Officer has rejected the bail application of the appellant vide impugned order dated 14.1.2019.
Learned counsel for the appellant argued that five of the six co-accused have already been enlarged on bail. Learned counsel has placed the copy of the bail order dated 29.1.2019 and 8.4.2019, passed in the case of Smt. Mohini Jaisawal vs. State of U.P. as well as Raj Kumari vs. State of U.P. and another, which are taken on record. It is further argued that no specific role was assigned as such the appellant is also entitled to the benefit of the said order. The applicant has no criminal antecedents and is languishing in jail since 28.5.2019.
Considering the submissions made at the bar, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the appellant is entitled to be released on bail.
Let appellant-Suneel Lodhi Alias Babloo, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- and two sureties each in 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 shall not tamper with the evidence of witnesses and shall not commit any offence.
(ii) The appellant 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.
(iii) The appellant 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.
(iv) In case, the appellant 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.
(v) The appellant 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.
Appeal is, accordingly, allowed.
Order Date :- 30.9.2019 Puspendra