Rajjan v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko

Court No. - 27 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12691 of 2023 Applicant :- Rajjan Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Punit Kumar Shukla,Priyanka Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Brij Raj Singh,J.

¶1Heard Shri Punit Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Mukesh Singh, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶2The present bail application has been filed by the applicant with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No.246 of 2015, under Sections 147, 302, 120-B, 34 IPC., Police Station Laharpur, District Sitapur.

¶3It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that admittedly, the complainant Manney Babu is not an eye witness. He himself has stated in the FIR that incident was seen by the eye witnesses, namely Ram Naresh and Durgesh and on the basis of information, the First Information Report was lodged. Learned counsel has submitted that eye witnesses Ram Naresh (PW-2) and Durgesh (PW-3) have been declared hostile and their statements have been annexed as Annexure Nos.9 and 10 to the afÏdavit accompanying bail application.

¶4Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the identical role assigned to co-accused Satya Narain and Vidyadhar have been granted bail by this Court vide orders dated 23.05.2023 and 19.09.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos.621 of 2022 and 9863 of 2023 respectively. He also submitted that the case of the applicant is at par with the aforesaid co-accused persons. The applicant has no other criminal history. The applicant is in jail since 16.07.2015 and looking to the period of incarceration, which is much high the applicant is liable to be enlarged on bail.

¶5Learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid submission of learned counsel for the applicant that the other co-accused persons mentioned above have been granted bail and fact witnesses have turned hostile.

¶6Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, after hearing learned counsel for the parties and looking to the argument that co-accused namely Satya Narain and Vidyadhar having similar role have already been granted bail; argument that long period of incarceration and argument that eye witnesses have turned hostile, therefore, I am of the opinion that the applicant is also entitled to be released on bail.

¶7Let the applicant, Rajjan be released on bail in the above case crime number 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 sufÏcient 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 sufÏcient 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.

¶8It is made clear that the observations made in this order are limited to the purpose of determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. The trial Court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led unaffected by anything in this order. Order Date :- 30.10.2023 Pks High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench