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

Court No. - 27 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12510 of 2023 Applicant :- Sumit 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 learned counsel for the applicant and Mohd. Ashif Khan, learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶2The present second bail application has been filed by the applicant with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 203 of 2023 under sections 302, 201, 394, 411, 120-B, 420, 465 and 34 IPC Police Station Kudwar District Sultanpur.

¶3Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that this is second bail application as the first bail application was dismissed as withdrawn on the ground that investigation was going on and the charge-sheet was not filed and after filing of charge-sheet, the present second bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant.

¶4It has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that in the FIR, the applicant is not named and the FIR was lodged on 21.06.2023 against unknown persons. After FIR, accused-applicant alongwith three others,namely,Ramagya, Rajesh Yadav and Bindeshwari were arrested on 03.07.2023. In arrest memo there is confessional statement of Bhola and Ramagya in which they have stated that co-accused Bhola strangulated the deceased while Ramagya is having role of catching hold.It has been submitted that there is no role assigned to the applicant in the commission of crime rather the arrest memo indicates that in the confessional statement of co-accused Bhola and Ramagya, it is stated that out of greediness, they killed the deceased because he was driver of the truck and to meet out their financial hardship they committed murder and looted the truck and the same was taken to Bihar where the applicant met and helped in changing the painting of the truck to give other colour of the truck so that it could have not been identified. He has submitted that there is no evidence collected by Investigating Officer which indicates that the applicant was involved in the commission of crime rather only allegation is levelled that he was involved in changing the colour of the truck so that it could have been sold without original identity of the truck. He has submitted that there is no evidence which shows that the applicant was involved in the commission of crime rather the role of Ramagya and Bhola have main role whereas the role of the applicant is quite distinguishable.The applicant has no previous criminal history and there is no possibility of fleeing away from the judicial process or tempering with the witnesses and in case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail.The applicant is in jail since 03.07.2023.

¶5Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts.

¶6Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and after hearing learned counsel for the parties and looking into overall facts and circumstances of the case as well as the argument that there is no role assigned in the commission of crime, argument that role of commission of crime is assigned to co-accused Bhola and Ramagya and the case of the applicant is quite distinguishable, therefore, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶6Let the applicant, namely, Sumit 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 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. It 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 :- 28.11.2023 dk/ High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench