Back
2024 Supreme(All) 607
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Attau Rahman Masoodi, J.
Guru Yadav @ Guru Charan - Applicant
Vs.
State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. - Opposite Party
Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. - 3678 of 2024
Decided On : 02-04-2024
For the Appellant : Nijam Ahamad
For the Respondent: G.A.
IMPORTANT POINT
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the accused applicant is entitled to be released on bail due to the absence of convincing reasons for the rejection of bail by the court below and the lack of corroborating evidence.
Headnote:
Bail Application - Accused Guru Yadav alias Guru Charan - The accused applicant is entitled to be released on bail due to lack of convincing reasons for rejection of bail by the court below and absence of corroborating evidence.
Fact of the Case:
The accused-applicant, Guru Yadav alias Guru Charan, filed a bail application in a case involving multiple sections of the Indian Penal Code and the Criminal Law Amendment Act. The court considered the arguments of the applicant's counsel and the Additional Government Advocate, and found that there was no specific evidence to assign a role to the applicant in the commission of the offense. The court also noted an order passed in favor of a co-accused by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, which lacked convincing justification for rejecting bail.
Finding of the Court:
The court, without commenting on the merit of the case, concluded that the accused applicant is entitled to be released on bail based on the lack of convincing reasons for the rejection of bail by the court below and the absence of corroborating evidence.
Issues: The issues involved in the case included the lack of specific evidence to assign a role to the applicant in the offense, the rejection of bail without convincing justification, and the absence of corroborating evidence.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the absence of convincing reasons for the rejection of bail by the court below and the lack of corroborating evidence, leading to the conclusion that the accused applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
Final Decision: The accused/applicant, Guru Yadav alias Guru Charan, involved in Case Crime No.153 of 2013, was granted bail subject to specific conditions.
JUDGMENT :
Attau Rahman Masoodi, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the accused-applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate and perused the record.
2. This bail application has been filed by the accused-applicant, Guru Yadav alias Guru Charan, who is involved in Case Crime No.153 of 2013, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 332, 336, 353, 504, 506 , 188/34 IPC and 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act, Police Station Ibrahimpur, District Ambedkar Nagar.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that there is no evidence on the basis of which specific role can be said to have been assigned to the applicant in the commission of offence. He has also brought to the notice of this Court an order passed on 26.10.2013 by the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate in favour of co-accused. From perusal of the record and the impugned order, it is gathered that bail has been rejected by the court below without recording any plausible justification. Reasons for rejecting the bail by the Court below are not convincing for the lack of corroborating evidence.
4. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but did not dispute the factual submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant.
5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and rival contention of learned Additional Government Advocate, without commenting upon the merit of the case, I am of the opinion that the accused applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
6. Let the accused/applicant, Guru Yadav alias Guru Charan, involved in Case Crime No. Crime No.153 of 2013, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 332, 336, 353, 504, 506, 188/34 IPC and 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act, Police Station Ibrahimpur, District Ambedkar Nagar be released on bail subject to the following conditions:-
(i) The applicant will furnish a personal bond with two sureties each of like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.
(ii) The applicant will appear and strictly comply following terms of bond executed under Section 437 (3) of Chapter 33 of Cr.P.C.-
(a) applicant shall attend in accordance with the conditions of the bond executed under this Chapter.
(b) applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected, and
(c) applicant 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.
(iii) The applicant shall cooperate with investigation /trial.
(iv) 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.
(v) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of his absence, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(vi) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial 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.
(vii) The applicant shall remain present, 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.
