Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2018 DIGILAW 588 (ALL)

Rahul Sahni v. State of U. P.

2018-03-12

RANG NATH PANDEY

body2018
JUDGMENT & ORDER : Rang Nath Pandey, J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. and perused the record. 2. Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of the applicant, is taken on record. 3. This bail application has been preferred by the accused-applicant, namely, Rahul Sahni, who is involved in case crime No.327 of 2017 under Sections 394, 302 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 7 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act, Police Station Ghosi, District Mau. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. F.I.R. has been lodged against unknown. Except the confessional statement of the co-accused Satya Prakash Yadav, there is no cogent material against the applicant. Nothing has been recovered from the possession of the applicant. Learned counsel has also submitted that co-accused of the applicant, namely, Satya Prakash Yadav has been granted bail by this court vide order dated 26.10.2017 rendered in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No.40594 of 2017. The applicant is in custody 5.12.2017. 5. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but could dispute the fact that except confessional statement of Satya Prakash Yadav, there is no cogent material against the applicant. 6. 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 commencing on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail. 7. Accordingly, this application for bail is allowed. 8. Let applicant, Rahul Sahni, 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 when the witnesses are present in the 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.