Court No. - 42
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 18117 of 2019 Applicant :- Veerpal Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Sanjay Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Manoj Misra,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant; the learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in case crime 482 of 2018, under Sections 147, 148, 452, 323, 504, 506, 307 and 302 I.P.C., police station Akrabad, District- Aligarh with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.
The contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the first information report was lodged on 7th August, 2018 in respect of an incident which is stated to have occurred on 3rd August, 2018. Six persons including the applicant were named in the first information report. According to the allegations, following a dispute in connection with Med of a field an incident of armed assault took place. It has been stated that there is a cross version of the incident which has been got registered through an application under Section 156(3) CrPC and in connection with the incident the applicant (Veerpal) and one Pappu Singh, who is also one of the accused, were examined for their injuries on the date of the incident i.e. 3rd August, 2018. It has been submitted that co-accused Virendra and Suresh have been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 4th December, 2018, passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.45265 of 2018 by noticing lodging of a cross case. It has been contended that the case of the applicant has been sought to be distinguished from the other accused by placing reliance on the statement made in the first information report that a Saria blow on the abdomen of Mahavir Singh was inflicted by the applicant for which he had to be admitted in the hospital and had to undergo surgery.
The contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that initial medical examination report of victim Mahavir Singh does not disclose that there was any perforation of the abdomen wall. It has been submitted that it is quite possible that he may have received some internal injury which might have to be operated but the initial medical examination report discloses no injury on the abdominal wall of the body and there is no injury which may suggest that there had been perforation of the abdomen wall. It has been contended that under the facts and circumstances of the case, as the other accused have been admitted to bail and the applicant has also received injuries in the incident which were examined on the same day of the incident of which there is no denial by the State, the applicant is entitled to bail. It has been submitted that other than the present case, the applicant has no previous criminal history. It has been submitted that the applicant is innocent with no previous criminal history and is in jail since 04.04.2019 and in case of being enlarged on bail, he would not misuse the liberty of bail.
Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant and has pointed out that from the post mortem report it appears that there had been a stitched wound found in the abdomen.
Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that this stitched wound was on account of surgery that the deceased had underwent and was not a direct result of any injury as would be clear from the initial medical examination report.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as also the submissions noticed above, without commenting upon merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
Let applicant Veerpal 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 following additional conditions, which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-
(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.
(ii) 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.
(iii) 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.
(iv) 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.
(v) 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.
Order Date :- 21.8.2019. Rks.