Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 1837 (ALL)

Washid v. State of U. P.

2016-05-12

ARVIND KUMAR MISHRA I

body2016
JUDGMENT Arvind Kumar Mishra-I,J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State. 2. It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that co-accused namely Ajai Gaur has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 17.03.2016 passed in Bail no. 1315 of 2016. Applicant is languishing in jail since 13.11.2015. It is further contended that other two accused persons namely Mohammad Shafiq and Babloo Pandey have also been admitted to bail vide order dated 31.03.2016 passed in Bail no. 1558 of 2016. 3. Learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail. 4. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tampering of the witnesses and prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 5. Let the applicant- Washid involved in Case Crime No. 1075 of 2015, under Sections- 419/420/467/468/471/411/201/413/35 IPC, Police Station- Kotwali, District- Unnao be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in 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 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.