Santosh Chaubey v. State of U.P

Court No. - 77 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 49955 of 2023 Applicant :- Santosh Chaubey Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Manoj Kumar Tripathi,Anshul Tiwari,Sr. Advocate Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Sudist Kumar Hon'ble Mrs. Renu Agarwal,J. Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for applicant and short counter affidavit filed by informant, are taken on record. Heard Mr. V.P. Srivastava learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. Manoj Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant, Mr. Sudist Kumar, learned counsel for informant, 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. 1239/2023, under Sections 467, 468, 471, 120-B, 379, 406 & 506 I.P.C., Police Station-Indirapuram District-Ghaziabad with the prayer to enlarge him on bail, during the pendency of the trial. Learned counsel for the accused-applicant submitted that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the instant case due to misunderstanding between the brothers. This F.I.R. has been lodged as under misconception. Parties have entered into compromise out of the court. By supplementary affidavit, Purushottam Kumar Cahaubey has deposed that they have compromised in connection of the F.I.R. No. 1239/2023, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B, 379, 406, 506 & 504 I.P.C. Short counter affidavit has also been filed by informant, in para 3 it is mentioned that both the parties have entered into compromise. Applicant is languishing in jail since 11.10.2023 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. On the other hand, learned counsel for informant submitted that there was a dispute between the parties but now both the parties have been entered into compromise. Considering the fact that the F.I.R. was lodged by informant as Case Crime No. 1239/2023 against the applicant, parties have entered into compromise that is on record. In para 3 of the short counter affidavit, it is mentioned that both the parties have entered into compromise. Applicant is languishing in jail since

11.10.2023. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case , accused-applicant is liable to be released on bail. Let applicant Santosh Chaubey 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 :- 30.11.2023 Sharad/- High Court of Judicature at Allahabad