Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2021 DIGILAW 44 (ALL)

Yogesh v. State of U. P.

2021-01-08

ALI ZAMIN

body2021
JUDGMENT : Ali Zamin, J. 1. Shri Santosh Kumar Yadav, learned Counsel for the applicant has filed supplementary affidavit today in the Court, which is taken on record. 2. Heard learned Counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record. 3. The present bail application has been filed by the applicant with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 621 of 2012, under sections 395, 397, 412 of I.P.C., Police Station Masoori, District Ghaziabad. 4. Learned Counsel for the applicant submits that according to the F.I.R. on 22.7.2012 four persons looted a Truck bearing No. HR 55C/2737 and after seven days of the incident i.e. on 29.7.2012 on the information of the Mukhbir Khas, the police has apprehended the four persons namely; Rakesh, Sunil, Kapil & applicant and shown the recovery of the said looted truck on their pointing from the plot of one Alok. The co-accused namely; Rakesh, Sunil, Kapil, Alok, Bhoora, Parvindar and Vinod have been granted bail by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide orders dated 18.12.2012, 23.11.2012, 18.2.2013, 5.12.2012, 24.1.2013, 8.11.2012 and 1.11.2012 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 33327 of 2012, 30327 of 2012, 30062 of 2012, 31740 of 2012, 2334 of 2013, 28864 of 2012 and 28393 of 2012, respectively, therefore, the applicant is entitled for bail on the ground of parity. There is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses and, in case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail. It is next contended that applicant has criminal history of three cases, in two cases he has been enlarged on bail and subsequent to present case, one case has also been registered against him in which the applicant is not on bail and he is languishing in jail since 29.7.2012. 5. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant but could not dispute the aforesaid fact that co-accused have already been released on bail. 6. 5. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant but could not dispute the aforesaid fact that co-accused have already been released on bail. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as sub-missions advanced by learned Counsel for the parties and also perusing the material on record, without expressing any opinion on merit of the case, the applicant is entitled for bail, let the applicant-Yogesh involved in aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his/her furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties' each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned, subject to the following conditions:-- (i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he will not tamper with the evidence and will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and will cooperate with the trial. The applicant 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. 7. The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad. 8. 7. The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad. 8. The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.