Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2015 DIGILAW 777 (ALL)

Manish Kumar Verma @ Rinku v. State of U. P.

2015-04-10

BRIJESH KUMAR SRIVASTAVA II

body2015
JUDGMENT Brijesh Kumar Srivastava-II, J. Heard learned counsel for applicant, learned A.G.A. and perused the record. 2. This bail application has been preferred by the accused-applicant, Manish Kumar Verma @ Rinku, who is involved in Case Crime No. 50 of 2015, under Sections 457, 380, 411 I.P.C. P.S.- Kotwali Dehat, District-Gonda. 3. It is contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the incident is alleged to have taken place on 21.11.2014 but the report of the said incident was lodged on 11.02.2015 with inordinate delay while recovery is alleged to have taken place on the next day. No explanation of delay has been furnished by the prosecution. It is also submitted that the first information report has been registered ante timed. The offence is triable by the Magistrate. The accused-applicant is in jail since 13.02.2015 having no criminal history to his credit as averred in paragraph nos. 14 and 16 of the affidavit filed in support of bail application. The applicant undertakes that he will not abscond. 4. Learned A.G.A. opposed the bail application on the ground of assertions made in the F.I.R. The period of detention is not disputed. 5. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made by learned counsel for both sides and going through the record, without commenting on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail. 6. Let applicant, Manish Kumar Verma @ Rinku, 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 with 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, if 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). 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 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 default of this condition is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.