Ram Prakash v. State of U.P

Court No. - 75 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 38916 of 2023 Applicant :- Ram Prakash Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ashish Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Anil Kumar Hon'ble Umesh Chandra Sharma,J.

¶1Heard Sri Ashish Kumar Singhlearned counsel for the applicant, Sri Anil Kumar, learned counsel for the informant as well as 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 the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 28 of 2023 under Sections 323, 419, 420, 467, 468, 504, 506 and 471 I.P.C., Police Station-Binwar, District-Hamirpur, during the pendency of the trial.

¶3Counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. The applicant is a marginal witness of the alleged sale-deed, he has neither committed any offence nor conspired with any of the accused persons to cheat anyone. It is next contended that it is a civil dispute and maximum it can be argued that the impugned sale-deed has no value in view of the Section 54 of the Transfer of Property Act and is barred by Section 59 of the Indian Registration Act and is insufficiently stamped. It is further contended that since no report is on record to establish that the impugned sale-deed was not bearing the signature and thumb impression of the transferer, therefore, at this stage it can not be alleged that the transfer deed is forged and factious one. The applicant is in jail since 10.07.2023, having no criminal history. In case he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty.

¶4Learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. have opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.

¶5Having regard to the submissions made above and the fact that the applicant has remained confined for more than two months, and after submission of the charge-sheet, there is no hope of early conclusion of trial, more so when co-accused persons have been granted bail and no reasonable apprehension has been brought to the fore by the State that the applicant, if enlarged on bail, would either temper 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-Ram Prakash, involved in 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;

(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 :- 1.11.2023 S.Verma High Court of Judicature at Allahabad