Shiv Nandan Singh & Anr vs State of U.P.

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in this case; the matter is triable by magistrate; charge sheet in the matter has already been filed. Applicant No.1 is 72 years old and applicant No.2 is 70 years old. The applicants are marginal witnesses. Co-accused Indra Devi co-purchaser of the land has been granted bail in Bail Application No.1046 of 2021 vide order dated 12.02.2021. Another co-accused Vishnu Narayan Tiwari has also been granted bail in Bail No.2308 of 2021 vide order dated 15.03.2021. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that case of the applicants is better footing than the co-accused who have been enlarged on bail. Learned counsel for the applicants claims parity. The applicants are languishing in jail since 17.02.2021 without having any criminal history.

It is further submitted that there is no possibility of the applicants of fleeing away after being released from jail or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicants are enlarged on bail, they shall not misuse the liberty of bail.

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicants.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, and also considering the nature of allegations, arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties, for the period for which they are in jail and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail on the ground of parity.

Let the applicants, Shiv Nandan Singh and Ram Shankar, involved in Case Crime No.C-1/2008 of 2020, under Sections 419/420/467/468/471, 120B IPC, Police Station - Sandila, District - Hardoi, be released on bail on their 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 applicants will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

(ii) The applicants will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

(iii) The applicants shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

(iv) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they 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.

(v) The applicants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of their absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against them under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

(vi) In case, the applicants misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicants fail to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against them, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.