Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2015 DIGILAW 1970 (ALL)

Avnish Yadav @ Bablu Yadav v. State of U. P.

2015-07-20

MANOJ MISRA

body2015
JUDGMENT Manoj Misra, J. Counter affidavit filed today, is taken on record. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Dinesh Kumar Rai for the informant and the learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 3. The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in case crime No.211 of 2014, under Section 307 IPC, Police Station Mubarakpur, District Azamgarh with the prayer to enlarge him on bail. 4. The submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is not named in the first information report. According to the prosecution case taken in the first information report the informant was taking morning walk at about 5 AM on 07.09.2014, when on a motorcycle two persons came and fired at him thereby injuring him at the back. It has been submitted that it is not stated in the first information report that the informant was in a position to identify the accused. It has been submitted that during the course of investigation statement of the informant was recorded which was to the effect that while the informant was recuperating from his injuries, on 08.09.2014, one Chandra Shekhar Singh, an acquaintance of the informant, told the informant that he was also taking morning walk that day and he, soon after hearing the gun shots, saw two persons escaping on a motorcycle and those two persons were Bablu alias Avnish and one Deepu Singh. In his statement, Chandra Shekhar Singh stated that he recognized those two persons in the light of a torch. It has been submitted that although the police has shown false recovery of country made pistol from the possession of the applicant but the same has not been connected with the crime by any ballistic report. It has been submitted that the applicant is innocent with no previous criminal history and is in jail since 24.10.2014 and, in case he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 5. Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant, but could not point out anything material to the contrary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and without commenting upon merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 7. 5. Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant, but could not point out anything material to the contrary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and without commenting upon merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 7. Let applicant Avnish Yadav @ Bablu Yadav be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a 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 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. (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.