Allahabad High Court
Rajesh Pal @ Pandey vs State Of U.P. on 10 November, 2022
Author: Rahul Chaturvedi
Bench: Rahul Chaturvedi
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 67 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 50271 of 2022 Applicant :- Rajesh Pal @ Pandey Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sunil Kumar,Nand Lal Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the complainant as well as learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.
By means of this application, the applicant who is involved in case crime no.225 of 2021, under Section 302, 201, 34 IPC, Police Station-Bidhanu, District-Kanpur Nagar is seeking enlargement on bail during the trial.
Contention raised by learned counsel for the applicant is that the FIR was got registered by one Sri Prakash Narayan Yadav on 08.07.2021 under section 302 IPC against unknown persons with the allegations that informant's son Ankit went to roam around the village around eight in the night and since then, his whereabouts is not known. At 5:30 in the morning on 08.07.2021, Narendra Yadav gave the information that after slicing his neck, dead body of Ankit Singh Yadav is lying near the tube-well. It is next contended that there is no ocular testimony of the entire incident. The name of the applicant has figured up for the first time in the statement of Raj Vishambhar Pal, who inferred the involvement of the applicant with the attending circumstances. In addition to this, alleged recovery of axe at the pointing out of the applicant was made on 12.07.2021 in the dead hours of night when there is no independent witness to the said recovery, making the entire recovery doubtful proposition. It is further contended that remaining co-accused persons whose name were surfaced during investigation, were bailed out by co-ordinate Bench of this Court on different occasions out of which Bhajan Lal@Bhajanu in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.39209 of 2022 have been granted bail on 19.10.2022 and Amit Pal in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.8299 of 2022 have been granted bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court on 25.05.2022, therefore, the applicant has sought parity with the abovesaid co-accused persons. The applicant is languishing in jail since 11.07.2021.
Learned A.G.A opposed the prayer for bail by making a mention that there is recovery of alleged weapon used i.e. axe but nature and circumstances in which the said recovery is being made, is doubtful proposition. In addition to this, learned A.G.A. has unable to point out any strong motive or mental element by the applicant in eliminating the deceased.
Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail.
Let the applicant, Rajesh Pal @ Pandey, who is involved in case crime no.225 of 2021, under Section 302, 201, 34 IPC, Police Station-Bidhanu, District-Kanpur Nagar, 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.
(v) THE TRIAL COURT MAY MAKE ALL POSSIBLE EFFORTS/ENDEAVOUR AND TRY TO CONCLUDE THE TRIAL WITHIN A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR AFTER THE RELEASE OF THE APPLICANT.
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 :- 10.11.2022 Sumit S