Jainendra v. State of U.P

Court No. - 64 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 19153 of 2021 Applicant :- Jainendra Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Om Narayan Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶1Supplementary affidavit filed today, is taken on record.

¶2Heard Mr. Om Narayan Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant as well as the learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record.

¶3The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Jainendra with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 104 of 2020, under Sections 302 IPC, Police Station Nagal, District-Saharanpur, during pendency of trial.

¶4There is allegation against the applicant of committing murder of his wife.

¶5Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. It is further submitted that son of the applicant has been examined as P.W. 2 before the trial Court. He has stated the manner of incident and only pointed out commission of offence of suicide of the deceased and not the offence of murder. It is further submitted that alleged offence is not made out against the applicant. He has no criminal history to his credit and is languishing in jail since 10.04.2020. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶6Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, he does not deserves any indulgence. In case the applicant is released on bail he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail.

¶7Having considered the submissions of the parties noted above, finding force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant; keeping in view uncertainty regarding conclusion of trial; one sided investigation by police, ignoring the case of accused side; applicant being under-trial having fundamental right to speedy; larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, considering the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil Vs. C.B.I. & Another, passed in S.L.P. (Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021, judgement dated 11.7.2022 and considering 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above their capacity by under trials and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, let the applicant involved in the aforesaid 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 that :-

(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.

(ii) 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.

(iii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. 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 applicant misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicants fail 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 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.

¶8In case, of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶9Identity and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

¶10The court below is directed to conclude the trial against the applicant, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of one year.

¶11The Registrar (Compliance) of this Court is directed to communicate this order to the court concerned within 10 days. Order Date :- 17.10.2023 SY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad