Court No. - 71
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 27365 of 2021 Applicant :- Vikash Saini Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Munna Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Kamlesh Kumar Mishra
Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
Heard SriMunna Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Kamlesh Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the informant, Sri Sanjay Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the State and perused the material on record.
The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Vikash Saini with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 101 of 2021, under Sections 323, 342, 34, 324, 307 IPC, Police Station-Sahajanwa, District- Gorakhpur, during pendency of trial.
It is submitted by learned counsel for applicant that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. It is further argued that as per the FIR, which was lodged against five persons including the applicant with the allegation that the applicant along with co-accused persons has assaulted the injured, namely- Daya Shankar, with the help of lathi, danda and sharp-edge weapons. The injury report shows that the injury no.1 is incised wound and caused by sharp-edge object and the injury nos. 2, 3 and 5 are simple in nature and caused by hard and blunt object about the injury no.6 there was only complain of pain all over the body but there was no visible injury. The CT scan of the injured, which was conducted subsequently was held to be normal. It is also submitted that from the allegation made in the FIR, it is not clear that who is the author of the injury caused to the injured. The statements of the alleged eye witnesses recorded by the police under Section 161 of Cr.P.C., namely Durv Chandra Yadav, and Mohan Yadav, were to the effect that the applicant was not involved in the assault although from the statements of other eye witnesses namely, Ram Narayan Goad and Rajpal specific role of assault has been assigned to the applicant and other co-accused persons. There are contradiction in the statements of eye witnesses as recorded under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. It is further argued that the applicant has criminal history of two cases, which has been explained in paragraph no. 17 to the affidavit accompanying the bail application. It is further argued that the other co-accused, namely, Dileep Saini has already been granted bail by another Bench of this Court vide order dated 15.09.2021 passed in Cri. Misc. Bail Application No. 23633 of 2021, copy of which order has been passed on to the Court today, is kept on record and the case of the applicant stands on identical footing, hence the applicant is also entitled for bail on the ground of parity. The applicant is languishing in jail since 25.03.2021. 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.
Per contra learned A.G.A. has 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 they will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail.
Considering the material/evidence brought on record, the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties as well as the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh vs. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22, 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 their 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.
It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of the bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case.
The party shall file computer generated copy of this order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by representative(s)/counsel of the applicant along with a self attested identity proof of the said person (s) (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number (s) to which the said Aadhar Card is linked.
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.
Order Date :- 22.9.2021 Jitendra/-