Raj Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko

Court No. - 27 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 13643 of 2023 Applicant :- Raj Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Sukh Deo Singh,Paritosh Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Brij Raj Singh,J.

¶1Heard Shri Paritosh Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Mohd. Asif Khan, 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.110 of 2023, under Sections 147, 323, 452, 504, 506, 34, 304 I.P.C. Police Station Baldirai, District Sultanpur.

¶3Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the case of the applicant is at par with co-accused namely Vipin has been granted bail by this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos.10153 of 2023 on 25.08.2023 and co-accused Babuna has been granted anticipatory bail in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application No. 1853 of 2023 respectively. It is submitted that the applicant has adopted the same arguments and grounds which were argued in the case of co-accused Vipin and Babuna as such the applicant is also entitled to be enlarged on bail on the ground of parity. The applicant has no criminal history and is in jail since 25.04.2023.

¶4Learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the fact that co-accused Vipin and Babuna having identical role have been granted bail by this court.

¶5Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and after hearing learned counsel for the parties and looking to the argument that the case of the applicant is coming within the purview of parity as the co accused Vipin and Babuna having similar role have already been granted bail, as such the applicant is also entitled to be released on bail on the ground of parity.

¶6Let the applicant Raj Kumar 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.

¶7It 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 :- 20.11.2023 Pks High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench