Court granted bail to applicant in criminal case involving Sections 147, 148, 307, 504 IPC, subject to personal bond, local sureties, and strict conditions regarding court appearances and transgressions.
Released on bail with personal bond and two local sureties subject to conditions of attendance and non-misuse of liberty.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 78
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 27396 of 2019 Applicant :- Raj Kumar Yadav Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Hari Bans Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Kamlesh Kumar Tiwari
Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
Heard Sri Hari Bans Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri P.K. Shahi, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record of the present bail application.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant – Raj Kumar Yadav with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No.72 of 2019, under Sections 147, 148 307, 504 I.P.C., Police Station Phephana, District Ballia.
It is argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case due to ulterior motive. It is next argued that as per allegation in the FIR on 22.05.2019 at about 09.30 p.m. when informant was returning along with his father Shesh Nath Yadav after attending a party and he stayed at Kalyani Chatti to drink water, then accused pesons came on motorcycle. Due to old enmity, co-accused Ram Nath Yadav and Ranjeet @ Vakeel were having country made pistol in their hands whereas the others accused persons exhorted to kill the father of the informant; on exhortation made by the applicant and other accused persons, co-accused Ranjeet @ Vakeel and Ram Nath Yadav fired upon the father of informant, due to which he sustained injuries. In the statement of injured the role of firing has been assigned to co-accused Ranjeet and Ram Nath Yadav whereas the applicant has been assigned the role of exhortation only. It is argued that criminal history of the applicant is explained in para no.16 of the affidavit filed in support of the bail application. It is next contended that there is no possibility of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses and in case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail and the applicant is languishing in jail since 23.05.2019. Accordingly, he requests for bail.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, he does not deserve any indulgence. In case the applicant is released on bail he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail.
Considering the material/evidence brought on record, the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties as well as the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh vs. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 , let the applicant involved in aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to 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.
Order Date :- 7.8.2019 Anand Sri./-
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant should be released on bail in an offence involving homicide and rioting.
Whether conditions attaching to bail including bonds and reminders of specific court appearances are necessary.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Dataram Singh vs. State of U.P. and anotherExplained¶8
Dataram Singh vs. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 · Who else cites this
4 provisions across 2 enactments
Raj Kumar Yadav
State Of U.P.
Manju Rani Chauhan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
