Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2019 DIGILAW 2688 (ALL)

Manoj Singh v. State of U. P.

2019-12-03

YASHWANT VARMA

body2019
JUDGMENT : 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Vikas Sahai learned AGA for the State and perused the record. 2. The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in Case Crime No. 119 of 2019, under Section 302 I.P.C., Police Station Bansdih, District Ballia with the prayer to enlarge him on bail. 3. For the purpose of evaluating the prayer for bail, the Court notes that although the applicant was named in the FIR, no material evidence has been gathered against him except that he was related to Rajesh Singh and Ranjit Singh. It is alleged that Ranjit Singh was incensed by the act of the deceased who had filed a complaint against him as a consequence of which his services came to be terminated. However even when the Court reads the statement of the accused as recorded at the time of their arrest and in the course of recovery on which alone the prosecution rests, it is manifest that no specific role has been assigned to the applicant. The applicant is otherwise stated to have no previous criminal history. The Charge-sheet is stated to have been filed on the conclusion of the investigation. 4. Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant but could not point out anything material to the contrary. 5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as also the submissions noticed above, without commenting upon merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 6. Let the applicant Manoj Singh 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 subject to following additional conditions, which are being imposed in the interest of justice:- (i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses. (ii) 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. 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. (iii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code. (iv) 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. (v) 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.