Allahabad High Court
Ramu vs State Of U.P. on 1 April, 2022
Author: Samit Gopal
Bench: Samit Gopal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 71 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 49237 of 2021 Applicant :- Ramu Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sanjay Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.
Heard Sri Sanjay Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri B.B. Upadhyay, learned counsel for the State and perused the material on record.
This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant Ramu, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 207 of 2021, under Sections 272, 273, 304, 420, 467, 468, 471, 34, 120B IPC & 60A, 60(1), 60(2) Excise Act P.S.- Dauki, District -Agra Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. He next submits that as per version of the First Information Report the allegation is that due to intake of noxious liquor the father of the informant died on 23.08.2021. He next submits that from the perusal of the version of the F.I.R. it is evident that the liquor was taken on 22.08.2021 from liquor shop at Kolara Kalan Nagla licensee shop and as per the statement of the informant, the father of the informant had also taken liquor on 23.08.2021 from private persons and later on he died. He next submits that the applicant is neither the licensee nor he was ever involved in selling out such a noxious liquor and further from the statement of the informant it is evident that the deceased had taken liquor from the house of Ramlal and his wife namely Indra Devi and as such the allegation against the present applicant is false and baseless.
It is further argued that the allegation against the applicant is that he was a driver of max vehicle from which liquor is alleged to have been transported. It is further argued that the applicant is not named in the First Information Report. His name has surfaced in the confessional statements of co-accused Dara Singh, Bantu @ Bhatendra and Hariom after 23 days of the incident. It is further argued that co-accused Ramveer Singh who is named in the First Information Report has been granted bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 21.02.2022 passed in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 53767 of 2021 (Ramveer Singh Vs. State of U.P.). Further, co-accused Manoj Kumar Singh and Virendra Singh @ Veeru who are not named in the First Information Report have also been granted bail by co-ordinate Benches of this Court vide orders dated 29.03.2022 and 16.03.2022 passed in Crl. Misc. Bail Application Nos. 52274 of 2021 (Manoj Kumar Singh Vs. State of U.P.) and 54883 of 2021 (Virendra Singh @ Veeru Vs. State of U.P). The said orders have been produced before the Court which are taken on record. He further argued that the applicant has no criminal history as stated in para 13 of the affidavit and in para 14 of the rejoinder affidavit and is in jail since 18.10.2021.
Per contra, learned counsel for the first informant and learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail and argued that the applicant is named in the confessional statements of co-accused persons but could not dispute the fact that co-accused Ramveer Singh, Manoj Kumar Singh and Virendra Singh @ Veeru have been granted bail.
After having heard learned counsels for the parties and perusing the records, it is evident that the applicant is not named in the First Information Report. His name has surfaced after 23 days of the incident in the confessional statements of co-accused Ramveer Singh, Manoj Kumar Singh and Virendra Singh @ Veeru. The role assigned to the applicant is of transporting the liquor and was a driver for the said vehicle.
Looking to the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence, this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.
Let the applicant Ramu, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number 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 will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever.
ii) The applicant will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.
(iii) 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.
(iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever. 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 I.P.C.
(V) 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 and the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A IPC.
(vi) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the applicant.
The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.
The bail application is allowed.
Order Date :- 1.4.2022 M. ARIF (Samit Gopal, J.)