Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2015 DIGILAW 1490 (ALL)

Collector Singh v. State of U. P.

2015-06-04

RANJANA PANDYA

body2015
JUDGMENT Mrs. Ranjana Pandya, J. Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned Additional Government Advocate for the State. 2. It has been contended on behalf of the applicants that the applicants have also received injuries in the alleged occurrence. The applicants have been in jail since 10.04.2015. The applicants do not have any previous criminal history to their credit. It has further been contended that the injuries No. 1 and 2 are caused by hard and blunt object meaning thereby the injury report of the informant also being the injured falsifies the prosecution version that only fire arms were used. It has also been contended that the prosecution has exaggerated the story and no such incident took place. The vision of the injured has not been lost as per medical report and the applicant is entitled to bail. 3. Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail. 4. Having regard to the submissions made on behalf of the applicants, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, considering the nature of accusation, severity of punishment in case of conviction, nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tampering of the witnesses and prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, the applicants are entitled to be released on bail in this case. 5. Let the applicants-Collector Singh and Rahul Singh, involved in Case Crime No. 120 of 2015, under sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 504 IPC and 3(2)V of SC/ST Act, PS Faridpur, district Bareilly, be released on bail on their executing a personal bond and furnishing two local sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions: (i) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they 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 applicants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of their absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against them under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code. (ii) The applicants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of their absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against them under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code. (iii) In case, the applicants misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicants fail to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against them in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code. (iv) The applicants 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 applicants are 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 them in accordance with law.