Court No. - 54
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 32709 of 2018 Applicant :- Vinay Kumar @ Vivek Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Raj Nath Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.
By means of this application, the applicant, who is involved in Case Crime No. 22 of 2018, under Section 306 IPC, Police Station- Bheempura, District- Ballia, is seeking enlargement on bail during the trial.
Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that on earlier point of time the FIR was registered as Case Crime No. 371 of 2017, under Sections 363, 366, 506 IPC against six other named accused persons on 29.11.2017. After the recovery of the minor daughter, Kumari Goldi (13 years), she was put for 164 Cr.P.C. statement in which she has candidly stated that she was having some grudge against her parents. On heard, she went to Ballia and from their to Delhi and came back in this journey, the applicant was not at all involved. After coming back the only role attributed to the applicant is that he used to tease her referring to the earlier incident and she was so moved that in teasement that she has taken extreme steps by pouring kerosene oil on her. There are as many as six named accused persons. There is a generalized allegation upon all of them and cannot be said that the applicant was ever updated to commit suicide. The next contention is that co-accused has been granted bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 24.05.2018 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 19462 of 2018, copy of which has been annexed as Annexure No. 9 to the bail application. The case of the applicant stands on similar footing of the abovesaid co-accused, hence, the applicant is also entitled for bail. The applicant is in jail since 22.03.2018, having no criminal antecedents to his credit.
Learned A.G.A opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts and the legal submissions as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.
Keeping in view the age and relationship of the applicant with the deceased and submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail.
Let the applicant-Vinay Kumar @ Vivek Kumar, be released on bail in Case Crime No. 22 of 2018, under Section 306 IPC, Police Station-Bheempura, District-Ballia on furnishing a personal bond and two 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 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 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, 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 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.
However, it is made clear that any wilful violation of above conditions by the applicant, shall have serious repercussion on her bail so granted by this Court and the trial court is at liberty to cancel the bail, after recording the reasons for doing so, in the given case of any of the condition mentioned above.
Order Date :- 28.8.2018 S. Thakur