Raju @ Raj v. State of U.P

Court No. -77 Case :-CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. -38713 of 2023 Applicant :-Raju @ Raj Opposite Party :-State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :-Sunil Kumar Gaur Counsel for Opposite Party :-G.A. Hon'ble Mrs. Renu Agarwal,J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. and perused the record. The present first bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No. 493 of 2018, under Sections 392 and 411 I.P.C., Police Station Hari Parvat, District Agra with the prayer to enlarge him on bail. Learned counsel for the accused-applicant submitted that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the instant case due to malafide intentions. The applicant was not named in the first information report. No incriminating article or material has been recovered either from the applicant or on his pointing out. The recovery of three mobile phones and Rs. 800/-is said to have been recovered in a planted manner as there was no public witness of the alleged recovery. The offence is triable by Magistrate. He next submits that after the arrest in the present case on 5.7.2018, the applicant has been falsely implicated in five more case. In four cases out of five the applicant has been granted bail by the trial court. In Case Crime No. 1057 of 2017 the trial court has rejected his bail application. Copy of the bail orders has been annexed as Annexure-3 to the affidavit accompanying bail application. He further submits that similarly placed co-accused Arjun alias Mota has already been enlarged on bail by another Bench of this Court, vide order dated 6.5.2019 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 19078 of 2019, copy of the bail order produced by learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record. Applicant is languishing in jail since 30.7.2018 and he is also entitled to be released on bail on the ground of merits as well as parity 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. On 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. Considering the fact that the applicant was not named in the FIR, there was no public witness of the alleged recovery, other co-accused Arjun alias Mota has been granted bail by this Court and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case , accused-applicant is liable to be released on bail. Let applicant Raju alias Raj 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 :- 16.10.2023 Faridul High Court of Judicature at Allahabad