Court No. - 45
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 34115 of 2018 Applicant :- Vinod Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Hari Shankar Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Siddharth,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.
The applicant was initially granted bail on 11.07.2007. Thereafter, he attended the trial and could not appear before the court below on 14.10.2015. He has been arrested and is in jail since 29.05.2018.
The argument is that the applicant appeared before the trial court from 2007 to 2015 but the trial could not be concluded. On account of illness of Jaundice he could not appear before the court and was being treated in village and could not attend his trial.
On the other hand learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail.
Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another reported in (2018)3 SCC 22 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.
Let the applicant, Vinod, involved in Case Crime No. 91 of 2007 under Sections 379, 411 I.P.C. and 136 Electricity Act, Police Station Nivadi, District- Ghaziabad be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.
1. The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.
2. The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.
3. The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.
4. The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which they are accused, or suspected of the commission of which they are suspected.
5. The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper wiMoradabadth the evidence.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the complainant is free to move an application for cancellation of bail before this court.
The trial court is directed to conclude the trial within six months.
Order Date :- 19.9.2018 Rohit