Court No. - 67
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 5560 of 2019 Appellant :- Teetu @ Krishnakant Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Abhijit Mishra,Bhavya Sahai Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Rajesh Kumar Yadav
Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.
Heard lSri Bhavya Sahai, Advocate assisted by Abhijit Mishra, learned counsel for the appellant, learned counsel for the complainant as well as learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.
This criminal appeal under Section 14 A (2) of Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (in short "S.C./S.T. Act") has been filed for setting-aside the bail rejection order dated 05.08.2019 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST (PA) Act, Mainpuri in Bail Application No.106 of 2019 arising out of case crime no.221 of 2019 under Section 302 IPC and Section 3(2)(V) of SC/ST Act, Police Station-Kurawali, District-Mainpuri.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the FIR was got registered against the Surjeet Kumar and Abhishek Kumar. The appellant is not even named in the FIR. His name has figured up in the 161 Cr.P.C. statements of appellant Keerat Pal, Surendra Singh and co-accused Surjeet. The applicants are languishing in jail since 17.06.2019.
Learned A.G.A as well as learned counsel for the complainant opposed the prayer for bail.
I have perused the statement of Surendra Singh that it is clear that Surjeet was having affair with the deceased Ruby, it seems that on account of certain differences she was got engaged with another person, namely, Umakant. Infuriated by this Surjeet has a strongest motive to eliminate her. The name of the applicant unnecessarily dragged by the co-accused. There is nothing incriminating was recovered during investigation against the appellant.
The submission made by learned counsel for the applicant, prima facie, is quite appealing and convincing for the purpose of bail only. Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, 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-Teetu @ Krishnakant, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable 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/SHE 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/HER COUNSEL. IN CASE OF HIS/HER ABSENCE, WITHOUT SUFFICIENT CAUSE, THE TRIAL COURT MAY PROCEED AGAINST HIM/HER UNDER SECTION 229-A IPC.
(iii) IN CASE, THE APPLICANT MISUSES THE LIBERTY OF BAIL DURING TRIAL AND IN ORDER TO SECURE HIS/HER 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/HER 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.
However, it is made clear that any wilful violation of above conditions by the applicant, shall has serious repercussion on his bail so granted by this court.
Accordingly, the appeal succeeds and the same stands allowed. Impugned order dated 05.08.2019 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST (PA) Act, Mainpuri, is hereby set aside.
Order Date :- 18.12.2019 Abhishek Sri.