Faheem v. State of U.P

Court No. - 74 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 46052 of 2023 Applicant :- Faheem Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Navin Kumar Srivastava 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.

¶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. 159 of 2023, under Sections 3/5/8 of Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act, Police Station-Nawabad, District-Jhansi, 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. The name of the applicant was disclosed by co-accused Sameer in police custody. The said statement, insofar as it implicates the applicant, is unreliable. No recovery of any incriminating article has been made from the applicant. It is next contended that identically placed co-accused Munna @ Rafeeq Qureshi has been granted bail by this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 40076 of 2023 vide order dated 21.09.2023. 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 another case. The applicant is in jail since

24.06.2023 and 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. The name of the applicant was disclosed by co-accused, Sameer in police custody. Identically placed co-accused Munna @ Rafeeq Qureshi has been granted bail by this Court. Further, the applicant has remained confined for more than four 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, Faheem, 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 temper with the prosecution evidence; ii. the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witness; and, 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 :- 1.11.2023 Lbm/- High Court of Judicature at Allahabad