IMPORTANT POINT
The court established that a single FIR and prior bail can be sufficient grounds for granting bail, provided the applicant agrees to comply with conditions aimed at ensuring accountability during the trial.

JUDGMENT :

Rajesh Singh Chauhan, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned Additional Government Advocate for the State.

2. As per learned counsel for the applicant, the present applicant is languishing in jail since 27.3.2024 in Case Crime No. 30 of 2024 u/s 3(1) of Uttar Pradesh Gangsters & Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, P.S. Barasagwar, District Unnao.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the present applicant has falsely been implicated in this case as he has not committed any offence as alleged in the prosecution story.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant has further submitted that against the present applicant there is only one case shown in the gang chart (Annexure No. 2) in which the applicant has been granted bail by this Court. The bail order has been enclosed as Annexure No. 3 this bail application.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant undertakes on behalf of applicant that the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail, if so granted by this Court and shall abide by all terms and conditions of the bail order and shall cooperate with the trial proceedings.

6. Learned Additional Government Advocate has, however, opposed the prayer for bail but he has not disputed the aforesaid submission of learned counsel for the applicant.

7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, perusing the material available on record, arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and also considering the fact that there is only one F.I.R. against the applicant and in that too he has already been granted bail and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail.

8. Let the applicant- Rajkishore @ Lalla, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the 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 applicants fail 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.