FARMAN vs STATE OF U P

Heard Sri P.K. Shukla, learned counsel for applicant, Sri S.A.S. Abidi, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

Applicant-Farman seeks bail in Case Crime No. 02/2016, under Sections 395, 412 IPC, P.S. Bithari Chainpur, District Bareilly.

It is submitted that name of the applicant surfaced for the first time in the confessional statement of co-accused Hasim after three months of the alleged occurrence, whereas the said co-accused has also been bailed out by this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 33972 of 2016 on 19.11.2016, in so far as criminal history of three cases are concerned as reported by learned AGA, the applicant claims to have been acquitted in Case Crime No. 956 of 2013, under Section 457, 380, 411 IPC by the trial court and in other two cases, he has been enlarged on bail. The applicant claims to be in jail since 03.01.2017, undertakes not to misuse the liberty, he be enlarged on bail.

Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail. Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail.

Let the applicant- Farman involved in aforesaid case be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:- (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.