Sharad Yadav v. State of U.P

Court No. - 77 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 36260 of 2023 Applicant :- Sharad Yadav Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Santosh Kumar Pandey,Rajeev Kumar Agrawal Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Mrs. Renu Agarwal,J.

¶1Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record.

¶2Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶3The present first bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No. 249 of 2023 under Sections 364-A I.P.C. Police Station Meja, District Prayagraj with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.

¶4Learned counsel for the accused-applicant submitted that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the instant case due to malafide intentions. Allegations as per the F.I.R. is that husband of the informant received a phone call from someone who desired to meet him and when the husband of the informant went to meet him, he was abducted by some unknown persons. It is submitted that it is not mentioned in the F.I.R. as to who called the husband of the informant on the said date of incident. It is next submitted that there is no demand of ransom by the applicant. It is contended that applicant is not named in the F.I.R. and his surfaced when the alleged abductee Balram heard the name of the applicant from the three accused persons who were alleged to have abducted him. It is further contended that abductee was medically examined, however, medical report is not on record. It is also contended that alleged abductee was recovered by police when he dialed 112. Applicant is languishing in jail since 16.06.2023 and if he is granted the liberty of bail he will not misuse the same and he is ready to furnish his sufficient sureties, bonds and personal bonds and shall co-operate in the trial.

¶5On the other hand, learned AGA has opposed the prayer of bail but could not controvert the aforesaid arguments as advanced by learned counsel for the applicant.

¶6Considering the fact that the applicant was not named in the F.I.R., there is no cogent piece of evidence to connect accused-applicant to the alleged incident of abduction, there is no CDR report to connect the applicant with the present crime, husband of the informant was recovered by the police when 112 was dialed, there is no medical report on record, there is nothing on record to show that ransom was demanded or given to the applicant and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, accused-applicant is liable to be released on bail.

¶7Let applicant Sharad Yadav be released on bail in the above case crime number and on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Court concerned with the following conditions :-

(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 applicant shall also furnish an undertaking from the sureties that the properties (movable/immovable) which are the basis of accepting the surety, shall not be disposed of by them till the conclusion of trial.

(vi) The applicant shall also give an undertaking to the effect that he will not change his address without prior intimation to the trial court concerned. (Renu Agarwal,J.) Order Date :- 17.10.2023 Karan High Court of Judicature at Allahabad