Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2015 DIGILAW 2046 (ALL)

Amit Yadav @ Atul v. State of U. P.

2015-07-22

MANOJ MISRA

body2015
JUDGMENT Manoj Misra, J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, the learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in case crime No. 60 of 2014, under Sections 395, 397 I.P.C., police station G.R.P., District-Etawah with the prayer to enlarge him on bail. 3. The submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is not named in the FIR. The prosecution case is based on recovery of a mobile phone and Rs. 300/- cash from the possession of the applicant. It has been submitted that the recovery shown is fabricated and false of which there is no independent witnesses. It has next been submitted that the other co-accused namely, Rajjan Singh and Manoj Kumar have been granted bail by this Court vide orders dated 20.3.2015 and 12.2.2015 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 8693 of 2015 and 5194 of 2015 respectively. It has lastly been submitted that the applicant is in jail since 28.10.2014 and in case he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 4. Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant. 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. 5. Let applicant Amit Yadav @ Atul 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. (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.