Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2015 DIGILAW 1477 (ALL)

Manjeet Singh @ Meeta v. State of U. P.

2015-06-01

RAMESH SINHA

body2015
JUDGMENT Ramesh Sinha, J. Heard Sri Alok Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Vikas Rana, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is said to have taken away the deceased from his house on 18.3.2015 and his dead body was found in a village pond on 20.3.2015. He submits that an application under Section 39 Cr.P.C. was moved by the Bhanja of the deceased and information was given by him that a dead body was lying in pond. The inquest of the deceased was conducted and informant who was also present at the time of the incident but he did not name any person. He submits that the post mortem report was conducted and on 23.3.2015 and an application was moved by son of the deceased wherein involvement of the applicant was suspected by him. He further submits that there is no eye witness account of the incident to connect with him in the present case and there is no incriminating article recovered at the pointing out of the applicant. The applicant is in jail since 27.3.2015. 3. Learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail . Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. 4. Let the applicant Manjeet Singh @ Meeta involved in Case Crime No. 445 of 2015, under Sections 302, 201, 506 IPC, P.S.-Pooranpur, District Pilibhit be released on bail 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 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 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.