Court No. - 42
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 20305 of 2019 Applicant :- Sunil Yadav Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Praduman Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
Heard Mr. Praduman Tiwari, learned counsel 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-Sunil Yadav with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 704 of 2018, under Sections 302, 120-B, 34 I.P.C., Police Station- Civil Line, District-Allahabad, during the pendency of the trial.
It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is a young boy and is student of B.A. Part-1 of Allahabad University, Allahabad. The applicant is not named in the FIR. The name of the applicant came into light in the confessional statement of co-accused Rakesh Kumar, who has also been implicated in the present case, which was recorded after nearly 48 days from the date of the alleged incident. It has further been submitted that the police have falsely roped the entire family members of the applicant. There is allegations of hatching conspiracy and helping the killers against the applicant. There is no cogent evidence with regard to the conspiracy and helping the killers, against the applicant. There is no cogent evidence to connect the applicant with the alleged offence. There is no motive to the applicant to commit the alleged offence. No incriminating material has been recovered from the possession of the applicant. It has further been submitted that the applicant has falsely been implicated in one other case. It is next submitted that the co-accused, namely, Ranjana Yadav, who has also been assigned the role of hatching conspiracy and providing of gun and money to the killers, has already been enlarged on bail by the another Bench of this Court vide order dated 28th May, 2019 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 22206 of 2019. The case of the present applicant is similar and identical to that of the co-accused Ranjana Yadav. As such the present applicant is also liable to be enlarged on bail. Learned counsel for the applicant has orally submitted that the applicant has two criminal antecedents to his credit except the present one but the same have been lodged against the applicant subsequent to the present case. 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 19th February, 2019.
Per contra learned A.G.A. and the learned counsel for the informant have 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. and the learned counsel for the informant 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 :- 6.6.2019 Sushil/-