Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2015 DIGILAW 1527 (ALL)

Aaditya @ Bhoora v. State of U. P.

2015-06-12

VIVEK KUMAR BIRLA

body2015
JUDGMENT Vivek Kumar Birla, J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A. G. A. for the State and perused the record. 2. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the co-accused Sanjay has already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 29.4.2015 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 14443 of 2015. He further submitted that since the role of the applicant is identical to that of the co-accused who has already been enlarged on bail, he is also entitled to be enlarged on bail on the ground of parity. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that the applicant is in jail since 22.12.2014. 3. The prayer for bail has vehemently been opposed by learned A. G. A. However, he does not dispute the fact that the similarly placed co-accused has been granted bail by this Court. 4. Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A. G. A. and the fact that identically placed co-accused Sanjay has already been enlarged on bail by this Court, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, it is deemed fit to enlarge the applicant on bail. 5. In view of the above, let the applicant Aaditya @ Bhoora be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned in Case Crime No. 439 of 2014, under Sections 392 and 411 IPC, P.S. Singhawli Ahir, District Baghpat on 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. (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.