Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in Case Crime No.1 of 2019, under Sections 364-A, 506, 34 I.P.C., Police Station - Peeparpur District - Amethi.
The occasion of present bail application arisen on rejection of bail plea of applicant by Additional Sessions Judge, Sultanpur vide order dated 7.2.2019.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the bail applicant is quite innocent and he has falsely been implicated in this case. There is no independent witness of the alleged incident recovery. Accused applicant is not named in the FIR, his name was first of all disclosed in the statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. recorded by the investigating officer.
He further submits that the applicant is languishing in jail since 1.1.2019. There is no previous criminal history of the accused applicant and there is no likelihood that the accused applicant after release on bail may flee from the process of law or will misuse the liberty of bail.
Learned counsel for the bail applicant further submits that the co-accused Santosh Yadav and Anoop @ Guddu Yadav involved in the same case crime number for similar nature of offence have already been granted bail by co-ordinate Benches of this Court vide orders dated 1.3.2019 and 15.4.2019 respectively, therefore, on the ground of parity, the present bail applicant has also been entitled for bail.
Learned A.G.A has, however, opposed the prayer for grant of bail but he has not disputed the above contention made by learned counsel for the accused-applicant.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, perusing the record and also considering the nature of allegations, arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a fit case for granting bail.
Let applicant (Vinay Tiwari) 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 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 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.
(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.
Order Date :- 30.8.2019 Gaurav/-