Allahabad High Court
Divesh vs State Of U.P. on 11 May, 2020
Author: Suneet Kumar
Bench: Suneet Kumar
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?In Chamber Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12126 of 2020 Applicant :- Divesh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sandeep Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Suneet Kumar,J.
The instant bail application has been filed with a prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 109 of 2018, under sections 452, 323, 506, 307 I.P.C., Police Station Chandinagar, District- Baghpat, during pendency of trial.
As per the prosecution case, applicant and three other co-accused entered the house of the informant and caused fire arm injury by a licensed rifle; two persons, namely, Vinod and Nirankar have incurred injury and were medically examined.
It is urged that the allegation against the applicant is false and incorrect; applicant has been falsely implicated as the informant had lost a civil suit instituted by one of the co-accused; applicant is a government servant serving in the Indian Army; there is contradictions in the version of the F.I.R. and statement, wherein, it has been stated that the injury was caused by country-made pistol, whereas, in the F.I.R. it is alleged that it was a licensed rifle; the applicant has no previous criminal antecedents; applicant is languishing in jail since 26.02.2020 and in case he is enlarged on bail he will not misuse the liberty of bail.
Perused the material placed on record and rejection order passed by the court below.
Let the applicant-Divesh involved in aforesaid case crime 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 with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-
(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.
(v) The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.
(vi) The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.
(vii) The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.
In view of the extraordinary situation prevailing in the State due to Covid-19, the directions of this Court dated 6.4.2020 passed in Public Interest Litigation No. 564 of 2020 (In re vs. State of U.P.), shall also be complied.
The order reads thus:
"Looking to impediments in arranging sureties because of lockdown, while invoking powers under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, we deem it appropriate to order that all the accused-applicants whose bail applications came to be allowed on or after 15th March, 2020 but have not been released due to non-availability of sureties as a consequence to lockdown may be released on executing personal bond as ordered by the Court or to the satisfaction of the jail authorities where such accused is imprisoned, provided the accused-applicants undertakes to furnish required sureties within a period of one month from the date of his/her actual release."
Order Date :- 11.5.2020 K.K. Maurya