Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2017 DIGILAW 1561 (ALL)

Attu Alias Atendra v. State of U. P.

2017-06-27

RAMESH SINHA

body2017
JUDGMENT Sri Vivek Kumar holding brief of Sri Ajatshatru Pandey, Advocate has filed his power on behalf of the complainant which is taken on record. Heard Sri Ajay Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Sri Vivek Kumar holding brief of Sri Ajatshatru Pandey, learned counsel for the complainant and Sri R.D. Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has not been assigned any role of causing injury to the injured as the same has been assigned to co-accused Pawan and Satish. He further submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. The applicant is in jail since 30.12.2016. Learned counsel for the complainant as well as learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail. Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. Let the applicant Attu Alias Atendra involved in Case Crime No. 497 of 2016, under Sections 302, 386 IPC, P.S.-Aurangabad, District Bulandshahar be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following 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. The case of the applicant is distinguishable from the case of co-accused Pawan and Satish.