Allahabad High Court
Sharad Yadav vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. ... on 6 April, 2022
Author: Suresh Kumar Gupta
Bench: Suresh Kumar Gupta
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH ?Court No. - 15 Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 380 of 2022 Appellant :- Sharad Yadav Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Mayank Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Suresh Kumar Gupta,J.
Supplementary affidavit filed by the counsel for the appellant is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant/appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record.
This appeal has been preferred under Section 14 (A) (2) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 against impugned order dated 18.2.2022 passed by Special Judge, (SC/ST Act), Lucknow in bail application no. 550 of 2022 arising out of Case Crime No. 435 of 2021, under Sections 147, 148, 323, 504, 506, 452, 448, 120-B IPC read with Sections 3(1)(Da), 3(1)(Dha) of SC/ST Act, Police Station- Krishna Nagar, District- Lucknow, whereby the bail application of the appellant/applicant has been rejected.
Learned counsel for appellant submits that the appellant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the aforesaid crime. Learned counsel for appellant further submits that the applicant/appellant is not named in the FIR. The name of the appellant was disclosed in the statement of complainant recorded u/s 161 CrPC. Learned counsel further submits that no date or time is mentioned in the FIR. Only general role was assigned to the appellant. Thus, no offence is made out against the appellant.
Learned counsel further submits that although, the appellant has four criminal cases which is clearly explained in Para 6 of the supplementary affidavit, in which the appellant has already been granted bail by the court below. The appellant is in jail since 10.1.2022. Learned counsel further submits that if the appellant is released on bail, he would not misuse liberty of bail and is ready to co-operate in the trial.
Learned A.G.A. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and have submitted that the offence is serious in nature and appellant has no ground to release on bail and the bail application is liable to be rejected.
After hearing the rival submissions of the parties, and perused the record, without expressing any opinion on merits, I find that it is a fit case for grant of bail of appellant/applicant.
Impugned order dated 18.2.2022 is hereby set aside.
The appeal is hereby allowed.
Let appellant- Sharad Yadav be enlarged on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following additional conditions, which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-
(i) The appellant shall not tamper with the evidence of witnesses and shall not commit any offence.
(ii) The appellant 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 appellant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through her 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.
(iv) In case, the appellant 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 appellant 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.
(v) The appellant 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 appellant 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.
Order Date :- 6.4.2022 Shravan