Allahabad High Court
Narendra @ Rahul vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. on 18 August, 2022
Author: Krishan Pahal
Bench: Krishan Pahal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH ?Court No. - 16 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7350 of 2022 Applicant :- Narendra @ Rahul Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Anurag Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.
Heard Sri Anurag Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Vinay Kumar Shahi, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record.
Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.509 of 2021, under Section 459 IPC, Police Station Sandana, District Sitapur, during the pendency of trial.
As per prosecution story, some unknown three persons are said to have attempted to steal a box from the house of the informant. After hearing some noise, the son of the informant had woken up and as he tried to intervene, he was shot at by one of the said accused.
Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case with a view to cause unnecessary harassment and to victimize him. There is no test identification parade conducted as per law. The applicant has not been assigned the role of firing at the injured person. The applicant has been falsely implicated on the basis of false recovery jointly made from the accused persons. The criminal history assigned to the applicant has been explained vide supplementary affidavit filed on 10.08.2022. Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicant to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against him. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicant have also been touched upon at length. The applicant is languishing in jail since 16.12.2021. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.
Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application.
Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence on record regarding complicity of the accused, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.
Let the applicant- Narendra @ Rahul, who is involved in aforementioned case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.
(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the date 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 IPC.
(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., may be issued and if 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 IPC.
(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the Trial Court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) 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.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.
Order Date :- 18.8.2022 Ravi Kant