Narad v. State of U.P

Court No. - 74 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 43773 of 2023 Applicant :- Narad Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Deepak Singh Yadav,Sanjay Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

¶1Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State-opposite party.

¶2The instant bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. has been filed with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 299 of 2023, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 477-A I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali, District Mainpuri during the pendency of the trial.

¶3Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. The applicant is a bonafide purchaser of the disputed property through a sale-deed executed in the year 2003. It is next contended that co-accused Sahurwati, having identical role, has been granted bail by this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 35023 of 2023, Sahurwati v. State of U.P., vide order dated 09.08.2023. The applicant claims parity. The applicant was earlier involved in Case Crime No. 240 of 2014, under Section 379 I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali, District Mainpuri, wherein he has been granted bail. The applicant is in jail since 18.06.2023 and if he is released on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty.

¶4Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.

¶5Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of the record, this Court prima facie finds that the applicant is a bona fide purchaser through the sale-deed executed in the year 2003 and identically placed co-accused Sahurwati has been granted bail by this Court. Moreover, the applicant has remained confined for almost three and half months and after submission of the charge-sheet there is no hope of early conclusion of trial, and 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, therefore, 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-Narad, 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 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 SKT/- High Court of Judicature at Allahabad