Court No. - 72
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6917 of 2021 Applicant :- Suneel Yadav Urf Sunny Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Alok Kumar Rai Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate representing the State and perused the record of the case.
By means of this application, the applicant, Suneel Yadav Urf Sunny, who is involved in Case Crime No. 736 of 2020, under Sections 395, 342, 412 IPC, Police Station-Gagha, District- Gorakhpur, is seeking enlargement on bail during the trial.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that on 11.11.2020, the informant lodged the F.I.R. against 10-12 unknown persons making allegation inter alia that in the night of 10/11.11.2020, 10-12 unknown persons armed with country made pistol, lathi, danda came to the hut of labours and by force they have snatched total Rs. 76,300/-, nine mobiles and ornaments of the labours present there. The allegation has also been levelled that they tried to outraging the modesty of minor victims Khusboo and Pooja. The main substratum of argument of learned counsel for the applicant is that in this case the applicant was shown to be apprehended on 15.11.2020 by the Police showing a recovery of Rs. 9,390/- and one nose pin and two mobiles from the possession of the applicant. Similarly, other persons were also apprehended and from their possession different recovery has been shown. It is submitted that the main allegation of outraging the modesty of minor victims has been levelled against co-accused Mahendra Yadav, who is charge sheeted under Sections 395, 342, 354, 412 I.P.C. and 7/8 POCSO Act. It is next submitted that the case of the present applicant stands on different footing because charge sheet against the applicant has been submitted only under Sections 395, 342, 412 I.P.C. It is also submitted that prior to alleged incident dated 11.11.2020 the applicant was not having any criminal history and subsequent to lodging of F.I.R. dated 11.11.2020, he was falsely implicated in one case on 13.11.2020 under Section 395 I.P.C. registered as Case Crime No. 0286 of 2020 at P.S.-Lar, District-Deoria, which was also lodged against unknown persons. In the present case also the applicant is not named in the F.I.R. The case of the present applicant is distinguishable from the case of main accused Mahendra Yadav. The applicant is languishing in jail since 15.11.2020 and in case he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.
Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant.
Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a fit case for bail. Hence, the bail application is hereby allowed.
Let the applicant Suneel Yadav Urf Sunny be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-
(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.
(v) The applicant shall file computer generated copy of this order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.
(vi) The computer generated copy of this order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.
(vii) The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.
It is clarified that anything said in this order is limited to the purpose of determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. The trial court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led unaffected by anything said in this order.
Order Date :- 6.4.2021 Sunil Kr. Gupta