Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2015 DIGILAW 1521 (ALL)

Vikki @ Vikas v. State of U. P.

2015-06-11

RANJANA PANDYA

body2015
JUDGMENT Mrs. Ranjana Pandya, J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that he is in jail since 19.4.2015. He has explained his criminal history. The occurrence is said to have been occurred on 15.3.2015 but F.I.R. was lodged after delay on 19.3.2015. The applicant was not named in the F.I.R. Witness Manoj whose statement was recorded by the Investigating Officer on 22.4.2015 has given last seen evidence against the accused. It has further been contended that last seen evidence is a weak type of evidence. It has further been contended that there is no proximity of time between the last seen and recovery of the dead body in as much as the deceased and the accused are said to have been last seen together on 15.3.2015 whereas the dead body was the recovered on 19.3.2015. It has further been submitted that alleged recovery of country made pistol has not been connected to this matter. Hence, the accused is entitled to bail. 3. Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tampering of the witnesses and prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 4. Let the applicant Vikki @ Vikas involved in Case Crime No. 323 of 2015 under Sections 302, 364, 394, 201 I.P.C., Police Station Baraud, District Baghpat 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 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.