Court No. - 11

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5018

of 2023

Applicant :- Mulayam Yadav

Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Counsel for Applicant :- Ravi Kant,Akhilesha Nand

Pandey,Alok Pandey

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ram Singh

Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for

the State and also perused the material placed on record.

The present bail application has been filed on behalf of the

applicant in Case Crime No.0025 of 2022, under Sections

323/325/307/452/504/506 I.P.C., Police Station- Katka, District-

Ambedkar Nagar, with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant is

innocent person and has been falsely implicated in the case, he

is having no previous criminal history and in jail since

27.09.2022. He further submitted that co-accused, namely, Om

Prakash Yadav has already been granted bail by Co-ordinate

Bench this Court, vide order dated 03.01.2023 passed in

Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.9913 of 2022. In these

circumstances, the applicant is also entitled for bail. In case of

being enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

During course of arguments, learned counsel for the applicant

placed before this Court a photocopy of bail order of co-

accused, namely, Om Prakash Yadav Singh is taken on record.

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the

applicant but has fairly conceded that similarly situated co-

accused Om Prakash Yadav has already been granted bail.

Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the

applicant and learned A.G.A. and going through the record as

well as order of co-accused, this Court is of the view that it is a

fit case for bail. The bail application is allowed on the ground of

parity.

Let the applicant- Mulayam Yadav, who is involved in

aforementioned case crime be released on bail on his furnishing

a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the

satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following

conditions.

(i) The applicant shall not commit or participate in any offence

similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of

the commission of which he is suspected.

(ii) The 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 file an undertaking to the effect that he

shall not seek any adjournment on the date 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.

(iv) 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 IPC.

(v) 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., may be issued and if 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 IPC.

(vi) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the

Trial Court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2)

framing of charge and (3) 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.

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be