Ajay Kumar and Another v. State of U.P

Court No. - 72 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 18693 of 2023 Applicant :- Ajay Kumar And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Paritosh Sukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶1Heard Sri Paritosh Shukla, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Ram Mohit Yadav, learned AGA for the State and also perused the material placed on record.

¶2By means of the present application, the applicants seeks bail in GST No. 512 of 2010 arising out of Case Crime No. 366 of 2008, under Sections 2/3 of U.P. Gangster and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station-Quarsi, District-Aligarh, during the pendency of trial.

¶3It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants have falsely been implicated in the aforesaid offence due to ulterior motive. They were released on bail on the aforesaid case by the court concerned but they could not attend the Court due to inadvertence on 10.3.2022, as such, non-bailable warrant was issued against them. They have not misused the liberty of bail intentionally. Criminal history assigned to the applicants has been explained in the affidavit. The applicants are languishing in jail since

07.02.2023. In case, the applicants are enlarged on bail, they will not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate with the trial.

¶4Per contra, learned AGA has opposed the bail prayer of the applicants contending that the applicants have misused the liberty of bail. On account of continuous absence of the applicants, trial has been protracted and, as such, they do not deserve any indulgence.

¶5Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence on record regarding complicity of the accused and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicants have made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶6Let the applicants-Ajay Kumar and Vinod Kumar, who is involved in the aforementioned case crime number be released on bail on their 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 applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they shall not seek any adjournment on the date 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 applicants shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of their absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against them under Section 229-A IPC.

(iii) In case, the applicants misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C., may be issued and if applicants fail to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the Trial Court shall initiate proceedings against them, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A IPC.

(iv) The applicants shall remain present, in person, before the Trial Court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the Trial Court absence of the applicants 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 them in accordance with law.

¶7In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶8It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicants shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses. (Justice Krishan Pahal) Order Date :- 13.10.2023 Siddhant High Court of Judicature at Allahabad