Shashi Ranjan Tiwari v. State of U.P

Court No. - 74 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 41513 of 2023 Applicant :- Shashi Ranjan Tiwari Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sanjay Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

¶1Heard learned counsel for the applicant 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. 381 of 2023, under Sections 379, 411, 413, 420, 468 IPC, Police Station Bairia, District Ballia, during the pendency of trial.

¶3Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant was not named in the first information report. The name of the applicant was disclosed by co-accused Santosh Shah in police custody. The said statement insofar as it implicates the applicant is unreliable. The alleged truck was not recovered from the possession of the applicant. False recovery of a country made pistol and two live cartridges has been shown from the applicant. There is no independent witness to the recovery. The recovery of Rs. 5,000/- has also been shown from the applicant. The said amount belongs to the applicant. It is next contended that identically placed co-accused Chandan Yadav has been granted bail by this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 39804 of 2023 vide order dated 16.10.2023. The applicant claims parity. Prior to the instant case, the applicant does not have any criminal history, however, after his arrest in the instant case, he has been implicated in other cases. The applicant is in jail since 06.07.2023 and in case he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty.

¶4Learned AGA 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 FIR. The name of the applicant was disclosed by co-accused Santosh Shah in police custody. There is no independent witness to the recovery. Identically placed co-accused Chandan Yadav has been granted bail by this Court. Further, 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 Shashi Ranjan Tiwari, 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 :- 31.10.2023 Lbm/- High Court of Judicature at Allahabad