Sonu @ Saurabh v. State of U.P

Court No. - 74 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 38557 of 2023 Applicant :- Sonu @ Saurabh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Narayan Singh(Kushwaha) Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Indra Kumar Singh Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

¶1Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Indra Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the informant and learned AGA for the State-respondent.

¶2The instant bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. has been filed with a prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 211 of 2022, under Sections 307, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Jaithra, District Etah, during the pendency of trial.

¶3Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. As per the allegations in the first information report, five named accused including the applicant and 4-5 unknown persons are alleged to have fired on the father of the informant. As per the medical report, the injured sustained fire arm injury on his left arm. Even in the statement of the injured, all the accused persons are alleged to have fired on the father of the informant. No specific role has been assigned to the applicant. A vague and general role has been assigned to the applicant. The applicant has not been nominated as the principal offender, who caused the fire arm injury to the injured. It is next contended that prior to the instant case, the applicant was also involved in Case Crime No. 495 of 2021, under Sections 323, 307, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Jaithra, District Etah. The applicant is in jail since 01.07.2023 and in case he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty.

¶4Learned AGA and learned counsel for the informant have opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.

¶5Having heard counsel for the parties and having perused the record, this Court prima facie finds that a vague and general role has been assigned to the applicant. The applicant has remained confined for more than three months and after submission of the charge-sheet there is no hope of early conclusion of trial, more so when no reasonable apprehension has been brought to the fore by the State that the applicant, if enlarged on bail, would either tamper with the evidence or delay the trial or intimidate the witness, without commenting on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶6Let the applicant Sonu @ Saurabh, involved in the aforesaid case 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 the conditions that he:

(i) shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court;

(ii) shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; and,

(iii) shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses.

¶7In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court. Order Date :- 13.10.2023 Lbm/- High Court of Judicature at Allahabad