Vishesh Baghel v. State of U.P

Court No. - 74 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 46367 of 2023 Applicant :- Vishesh Baghel Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Himanshu Mishra 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. 271 of 2023, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 504, 120B I.P.C., Police Station-New Agra, District-Agra during pendency of the trial.

¶3Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. Seven persons including the applicant are nominated in the first information report. The role of firing has been assigned to Alok Yadav, Alok Gautam and Saurabh Chaudhari. Even in the statement of the injured persons the applicant has not been nominated as the principal offender, who caused injuries. A vague and general role has been assigned to the applicant. It is next contended that the identically placed co-accused Sobhit Yadav has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 28.8.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 36503 of 2023. The applicant claims parity. The applicant does not have any criminal history. The applicant is in jail since

25.7.2023. 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 in the statement of the injured person the applicant has not been nominated as the principal offender, who caused injuries to the injured. A vague and general role has been assigned to the applicant. The identically placed co-accused Sobhit Yadav has been granted bail by this Court. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. Further the applicant has presently remained confined for more than 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, Vishesh Baghel 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 :- 2.11.2023 S.S. High Court of Judicature at Allahabad