Suryabali v. State of U.P

Court No. - 72 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 44062 of 2023 Applicant :- Suryabali Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Banshi Dhar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶1List has been revised.

¶2Heard Sri Kundan Mishra holding brief of Sri Banshi Dhar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Anil Kumar Mishra, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶3Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 85 of 2023, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 of I.P.C., Police Station-Phoolpur, District-Prayagraj , during the pendency of trial.

¶4As per prosecution story, the applicant, in collusion with co-accused person Amarnath, Son of Baiju, is stated to have purchased the land from him, thinking him to be Amarnath, son of Bachchu Lal. As such, the informant, Amarnath, Son of Bachchu Lal is stated to have been made an accused by the applicant before the court below.

¶5Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant has nothing to do with the said offence. He is a marginal witness to the sale deed executed in the name of Urmila Devi. Both the seller and purchaser belong to the same category of Scheduled Caste. As such, it is not a case of forgery, rather the applicant has himself been duped, as he has mistakenly purchased the land from Amarnath, Son of Baiju. The said sale deed has been cancelled in the Original Suit No. 1107 of 2023 vide order dated 12.07.2023, passed by Civil Judge (Junior Division) Court No. 17, Allahabad. He further stated that there is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 14.09.2023. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶6Per contra, learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the bail application of the applicant but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant and also the fact that the applicant has no criminal history.

¶7Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, pending trial and considering the complicity of accused, severity of punishment, at this stage, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶8Let the applicant-Suryabali involved in aforementioned case crime number be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. i. The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial. ii. The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness. iii. The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted. iv. The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail. v. 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.

¶19In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.

¶10Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

¶11It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion on the testimony of the witnesses. Order Date :- 28.10.2023 Mohini (Krishan Pahal, J.) High Court of Judicature at Allahabad