Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2015 DIGILAW 3513 (ALL)

Mudit Rathi v. State of U. P.

2015-11-06

ANJANI KUMAR MISHRA

body2015
JUDGMENT Anjani Kumar Mishra, 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. 256 of 2015, under Sections 394, 307, 120-B, 411, 420, 216-A I.P.C. and Section 10/12 Dacoity Affected Area Act, police station Ekdil, District-Etawah with the prayer to enlarge him on bail. 3. The contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that three persons are alleged to have committed robbery. Two of them were arrested on the spot, 1,00,000/- rupees out of 1,07,000/- rupees looted are alleged to have been recovered from their custody. Subsequently, the police has arrested the applicant and made a recovery of 32,000/- rupees. The submission therefore is that the money recovered belongs to the applicant because the bulk of the money except 7,000/- rupees had already been recovered on the spot and, therefore, it is a case of false implication on account of business rivalry. 4. Learned AGA could not explain this discrepancy pointed out by learned counsel for the applicant. 5. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the contention, I am of the considered opinion, the applicant is entitled to bail. 6. Let applicant Mudit Rathi be released on bail in the Case Crime No. 256 of 2015, under Sections 394, 307, 120-B, 411, 420, 216-A I.P.C. & Section 10/12 Dacoity Affected Area Act, Police Station Ekdil, District-Etawah 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. …………………