Allahabad High Court
Deepak Alias Subhash vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home ... on 17 September, 2022
Author: Dinesh Kumar Singh
Bench: Dinesh Kumar Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH ?Court No. - 10 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 10704 of 2022 Applicant :- Deepak Alias Subhash Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lucknow Counsel for Applicant :- Vikas Pandey,Arvind .Ku.Mishra,Rajeev Krishna Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the accused-applicant as well as learned Additional Government Advocate and gone through the entire record.
2. By means of this application under Section 439 CrPC, the accused-applicant seeks bail in FIR No.0413 of 2021, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 506, 34, 427, 302, 117 IPC read with Section 3 and 4 Explosive Substances Act, 1908 and Section 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act lodged at Police Station Majhola, Moradabad.
3. Learned counsel for the accused-applicant submits that the role of the accused-applicant is similar to that of co-accused, Abhay Tyagi, Ankit Sonkar, Keshav Chauhan, Saurabh alias Andoo, Ashu Sagar, Babu Bajrangi alias Rajababu, Vishal Chaudhary, Aashish Maseeh, Deepak Giri, Vishal Kumar Thakur, Sahil Sonkar, Sonu Kumar and Pawan Chauhan, who have already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide orders annexed as Annexure Nos. 4 to 16. The learned counsel claims parity. The learned counsel further submits that the accused-applicant has been languishing in jail since 28.03.2022.
4. Mr. Ashwani Kumar Singh, learned Additional Government Advocate, has opposed the bail, however, he does not dispute that the role of the accused-applicant is common to the said co-accused, who have already been enlarged on bail.
5. Considering the ground of parity and without commenting upon merit of the case, I find it to be a fit case for grant of bail.
6. Let applicant-Deepak Alias Subhash, accused of above-mentioned FIR/crime number, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two local and reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions, which are imposed in the interest of justice:-
(i) the applicant(s) 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(s) 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(s) misuse(s) the liberty of bail and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant(s) fail(s) 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; and
(iv) the applicant(s) 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 default of this condition is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 17.9.2022 MVS/-