Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2015 DIGILAW 1758 (ALL)

Ram Singh v. State of U. P.

2015-07-06

MANOJ MISRA

body2015
JUDGMENT Manoj Misra, J. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, Sri I.K. Chaturvedi for the informant; the learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. The present bail application has been filed by the applicants in case crime No. 348 of 2014, under Section 308 /323/504/506 I.P.C., police station Mau, District- Chitrakoot with the prayer to enlarge them on bail. 3. The submission of the learned counsel for the applicants is that the role of causing injury on the head has been assigned to Hari Mohan (non-applicant). It has been submitted that otherwise general role has been assigned to as many as four assailants. It has been submitted that the incident occurred on account of a dispute over filling of water from hand pump and, admittedly, the informant's party had come to the alleged assailants for ascertaining the reason for the dispute. It has been submitted that the applicants have no previous criminal history and are in jail since 25.10.2014 and, in case they are enlarged on bail, they will not misuse the liberty of bail. 4. Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant but could not point out anything material to the contrary. 5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and without commenting upon merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicants are entitled to be released on bail. 6. Let applicants Ram Singh, Prabhu and Kailash be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on their furnishing personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following additional conditions, which are being imposed in the interest of justice: - (i) The applicants 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 applicants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his 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 his 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.