Mobin v. State of U.P

Court No. - 74 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 41571 of 2023 Applicant :- Mobin Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Virendra Jaiswal Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

¶1Heard learned Counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶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.790 of 2022, under Sections 147, 148, 323, 504, 506, 307 I.P.C., Police Station-Baradari, District-Bareilly during pendency of the trial.

¶3Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant was not named in the first information report and has been falsely implicated in the instant case. Applicant has been implicated on the basis of confessional statement of the injured. The said statement is an after thought and it assigns a vague and general role to the applicant. It is next contended that the named co-accused Shiroj @ Firoj and Teepu have been granted by this Court vide order dated

4.1.2023 and 17.2.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 5912 of 2023 and 55540 of 2022 respectively. The case of the applicant stands on better footing to that of named co-accused. The criminal history of the applicant has been explained in para 16 and 17 of the bail application. The applicant is in jail since 24.7.2023. In case he is enlarged 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 counsel for the parties and having perused the record, this Court prima facie finds that the applicant was not named in the first information report. A vague and general role has been assigned to the applicant. The applicant has been implicated on the basis of confessional statement of the injured. The named co-accused Shiroj @ Firoj and Teepu have been granted by this Court. Further the applicant has presently remained confined for almost three months and 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 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, Mobin involved in the aforesaid case be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned on the following conditions that: i. the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; ii. the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witness; iii. the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court.

¶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 :- 19.10.2023 S.S. High Court of Judicature at Allahabad