Allahabad High Court
Sonu Verma vs State Of U.P. on 7 September, 2020
Author: Siddharth
Bench: Siddharth
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 70 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 14782 of 2020 Applicant :- Sonu Verma Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Kalp Dev Mishra,Pradeep Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Siddharth,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A.
There is allegation of robbery in the First Information Report against unknown persons.It is submitted that applicant was not named in the First Information Report.His name has surfaced during the investigation and he has been falsely implicated in this case.There is no recovery from the applicant. The applicant is in jail since 28.1.2016.The criminal history of the applicant has been explained in paragraph-3 of the supplementary affidavit.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant but could not dispute the aforesaid fact..
Keeping in view the nature of the offence, argument advanced on behalf of the parties, spreading of novel corona virus in jails, evidence on record regarding complicity of the accused, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India 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, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.
Let the applicant, Sonu Verma, who is involved in Case Crime No. 491 of 2015, under Section 392 I.P.C, Police Station- Jamania , District- Ghazipur, 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 not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.
(ii) 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.
(iii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(iv) In case the applicant misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicants fail 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.
(v) 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.
In case, of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
Order Date:-7.9.2020 Atul kr. sri.