Court No. - 41
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6860 of 2018 Applicant :- Sushil Alias Babalu Yadav Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ram Sajivan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.
Vakalatnama filed today by Shri Dashrath Lal Yadav, on behalf of the complainant/informant, in Court, is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for applicant, learned counsel for the complainant/informant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
This bail application has been filed by the applicant Sushil Alias Babalu Yadav seeking bail in Case Crime No. 516 of 2017, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302 IPC, and 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act 1932 P.S. Jhusi, District Allahabad.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant is wholly innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. As many as seven accused persons are said have opened indiscriminate firing at the victim. Co-accused Ashwani Kumar alias Sugga Yadav is alleged to have caused fatal injuries to the victim. There is one entry wound of firearm and it is improbable to identify the author. The applicant is in jail since 29.9.2017. There is no criminal antecedent of the applicant. Similarly placed co-accused Yogesh alias Yogendra has already been granted bail by this Hon'ble Court in Crl. MIsc. Bail applicant No. 5573 of 2018 vide order dated 15.2.2018..
Learned AGA has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by learned counsel for the applicant.
Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail.
Let the applicant Sushil Alias Babalu Yadav 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 the following conditions :-
(i) THE APPLICANT SHALL FILE AN UNDERTAKING TO THE EFFECT THAT HE SHALL NOT SEEK ANY ADJOURNMENT ON THE DATE 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/HER ABSENCE, WITHOUT SUFFICIENT CAUSE, THE TRIAL COURT MAY PROCEED AGAINST HIM UNDER SECTION 229-A IPC.
(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., MAY BE ISSUED AND IF APPLICANT FAILS TO APPEAR BEFORE THE COURT ON THE DATE FIXED IN SUCH PROCLAMATION, THEN, THE TRIAL COURT SHALL INITIATE PROCEEDINGS AGAINST HIM/HER, IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, UNDER SECTION 174-A IPC.
(iv) THE APPLICANT SHALL REMAIN PRESENT, IN PERSON, BEFORE THE TRIAL COURT ON DATES FIXED FOR (1) OPENING OF THE CASE, (2) FRAMING OF CHARGE AND (3) 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 THE HIM IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW.
(v) THE TRIAL COURT MAY MAKE ALL POSSIBLE EFFORTS/ENDEAVOUR AND TRY TO CONCLUDE THE TRIAL WITHIN A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR AFTER THE RELEASE OF THE APPLICANT.
In case of default of any of the conditions enumerated above, it will be open to the opposite parties to approach the Court for cancellation of bail.
Order Date :- 23.2.2018 R