Court No. - 72
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7694 of 2019 Applicant :- Vinod Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Pradeep Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.
Heard Sri Pradeep Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Sanjay Singh, learned A.G.A.-I appearing for the State.
It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. It is next contended that the first informant who has been examined as P.W.-1 of the case has been turned hostile and has not supported the prosecution story, reference in this regard is made to annexure-6 to the affidavit accompanying this bail application. It is further submitted that the applicant that the applicant has no concern with the alleged incident. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused has also been touched upon at length. It has been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required. It has also been submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 22.12.2016. It has been pointed out that the applicant has no criminal history.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail.
Having heard the submissions of learned counsel of both sides, nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment, and larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh v. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 2
SCC 22 and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a case of bail.
Let the applicant Vinod involved in Case Crime No.701 of 2016 under Sections 498-A, 304-B I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Kotwali, District Maharajganj be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with 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 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.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the trial court will be at liberty to cancel the bail.
It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case.
The trial court is directed to expedite the trial of the present case and conclude the same expeditiously preferably within a period of six months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order, if there is no legal impediment.
Order Date :- 20.12.2021 Dev/-