Allahabad High Court
Kayam Singh vs State Of U.P. on 11 July, 2019
Author: Manju Rani Chauhan
Bench: Manju Rani Chauhan
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 78 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 31601 of 2018 Applicant :- Kayam Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Shri Krishan Yadav,Praveen Kumar Pal,Tripurari Pal Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
Heard Sri Shri Krishan Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Mohd. Shoaib Khan, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.
The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Kayam Singh with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 223 of 1997, under Section 302 IPC, Police Station-Alau, District-Mainpuri, during pendency of trial.
It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is wholly innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. The co-accused-Deputy Singh has been granted bail by the another Bench of this Court vide order dated 09.11.1998 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 17268 of 1998, copy of which order has been passed on to the Court today is kept on record and the case of the applicant stands on identical footing, hence the applicant is also entitled for bail on the ground of parity. The applicant is languishing in jail since 30.10.2017. The applicant does not have any previous criminal history. In case, he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial by all means.
Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, he does not deserves any indulgence. In case the applicant is released on bail he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail.
Having considered the submissions of the parties 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, let the applicant involved in the aforesaid 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 with the following conditions that :-
(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence;
(ii) The applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses;
(iii) The applicant shall personally appear on the dates fixed by the trial court.
(iv) The applicant shall personally appear once in the first week of every month in the concerned Police Station for a period of two years. In case of any default, the In-charge, Police Station shall forthwith inform the concerned court about this breach.
In case of default of compliance with condition no.(iii) enumerated above, the order granting bail shall stand cancelled automatically and the court concerned shall issue non bailable warrant in order to get the applicant arrested and lodge him in jail.
It may be observed that in the event of any breach of the aforesaid conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to proceed for the cancellation of applicant's bail.
Office is required to communicate this order to the S.S.P. concerned who is required to convey this order to the concerned police station to ensure compliance of condition no.iv as provided herein before.
The concerned court below which will accept the bail bonds is also directed to convey a photo copy of this order to the concerned police station so that the condition no. iv provided herein before may be complied with.
It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of the bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case.
The trial court is directed to expedite the trial of the present case and conclude the same as expeditiously as possible from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order, keeping in view the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Alakh Alok Srivastava Vs. Union of India & Another reported in AIR 2018 (SC) 2440, if there is no legal impediment. If possible, the trial court shall proceed with the matter on day to day basis.
Order Date :- 11.7.2019 JK Yadav