Allahabad High Court
Pramod vs State Of U.P. on 17 December, 2024
Author: Samit Gopal
Bench: Samit Gopal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:197446 Court No. - 80 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2167 of 2024 Applicant :- Pramod Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Anil Kumar Dubey,Chandra Bhan Dubey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.
1. Heard Sri C.B. Dubey, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Bade Lal Bind, learned counsel for State and perused the record.
2. The present application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant Pramod with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No.128 of 2019, under Section 302 I.P.C., registered at Police Station Hastinapur, District Meerut, during the pendency of trial.
3. This is the third bail application. The first bail application of the applicant was rejected by this Court vide order dated 05.02.2020 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 4687 of 2020 (Pramod vs. State of U.P.).
4. The second bail application was also rejected by this Court vide order dated 22.09.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 43078 of 2021 (Pramod vs. State of U.P.).
5. Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the trial in the present matter has started in which four witnesses have been examined. It is submitted that two witnesses, namely, Joginder Kumar, first informant (P.W.-1) and Rukmani (P.W.-2), who are the alleged eye witnesses, have been examined before the trial court who have not supported the prosecution case and have been declared hostile by the trial court, copies of the statements have been placed before the Court which are annexed as Annexure-4 to the affidavit. It is submitted that further two witnesses, namely, Prem Singh, Sub-Inspector (P.W.-3) and Doctor Amar Singh (P.W-4) have been examined. It is submitted that looking to the fact that the first informant Joginder Kumar and Rukmani have been declared hostile and have not supported the prosecution case, the applicant has no criminal history as stated in para 14 of the affidavit and he is in jail since 25.06.2019, be released on bail.
6. Per contra learned counsel for the State vehemently opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the argument as aforesaid.
7. After hearing the counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is evident that the trial in the present matter is going on in which first informant Joginder Kumar was examined as P.W.-1 and the other eye witness Rukmani was examined as P.W.-2 and both the witnesses have not supported the prosecution case and have been declared hostile.
8. 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.
9. Let the applicant - Pramod, 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.
10. 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.
11. The bail application is allowed.
(Samit Gopal,J.) Order Date :- 17.12.2024 Manoj