Allahabad High Court
Deepak Singh vs State Of U.P. on 6 October, 2020
Author: Irshad Ali
Bench: Irshad Ali
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH ?In Chamber Case :- BAIL No. - 6964 of 2020 Applicant :- Deepak Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Om Chandra Sahu,Anish Srivastava 'Lall' Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Irshad Ali,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.
This is first application for bail application in Case Crime No.83 of 2020 under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506, 326A of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Gonda.
Submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case. He has invited attention of this Court towards medical report and the statement of Doctor who has reported the injury which demonstrate that there is no injury of acid and the injuries received by the victim are simple in nature. In view of the above, his submission is that no case has been made out under Section 326A of the Indian Penal Code. He also submits that the applicant is in jail since 19.7.2020 and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.
I have considered the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.
On perusal of the injury report and statement of the Doctor who has conducted the medical, it is prima facie established that no injury was caused due to acid attack.
In view of the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made by learned counsel for both sides and going through the record, without commenting on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail.
Accordingly, this second application for bail is allowed.
Let applicant (Deepak Singh) be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:
(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates 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 of the Indian Penal Code.
(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. is issued and the 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 of the Indian Penal Code.
(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) 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.
It is made clear that reasons assigned in the order will not be taken into account while concluding the trial.
Order Date :- 6.10.2020 GK Sinha