Gungai @ Laxman and Another v. State of U.P

Court No. - 76 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 28090 of 2023 Applicant :- Gungai @ Laxman And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Shri Prakash Dwivedi,Shree Prakash Giri Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Pradeep Kumar Srivastav Hon'ble Vikram D. Chauhan,J.

¶1Learned A.G.A. for the State submits that instructions have been received and has no objection in case the bail application is heard on merits.

¶2Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶3It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that as per the allegations in the F.I.R. the land bearing no. 28 having area 0.1670 hectare belongs to the informant, however, the applicants have executed the agreement to sale on 23.10.2021 in favour of co-accused and thereafter the co-accused persons are disturbing the possession. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants and informant have common ancestors of the property as devolved from the maternal ancestors and there is a dispute in regard to title and the name of the informant has been mutated on the entire property although the applicants were having claim. In this respect, the proceedings under the Consolidation Act are already going on between the parties. He submits that only the agreement to sale has been executed and the property has not been transferred. It is submitted that the dispute is purely civil in nature. Learned counsel for the applicants further undertakes that the applicants will take their possession on their share of property through recourse to law. The applicants have no criminal history. Applicant are languishing in jail since

22.05.2023 and in case they are released on bail, they will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial.

¶4Sri Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the informant has opposed the bail application, however, he does not dispute the fact that only agreement to sale has been executed. He further does not dispute the fact that the claim with respect to title of the applicants is already under consideration before the consolidation authorities. Considering the fact that there is dispute between the parties with regard to title of the property and the applicants have given undertaking that they will take possession of the property through recourse to law, the applicants are entitled to be released on bail.

¶5Learned A.G.A. for the State opposed the prayer for bail but does not dispute factual matrix of the case.

¶6Learned AGA for the State has not brought any fact or circumstances to indicate criminal history or antecedents of the applicant which would disentitle the applicant for Bail.

¶7It is not the case of the State that the applicants have not cooperated in the investigation or proceedings before the trial court.

¶8The principle that Bail is a rule and Jail is an exception has been well recognised by Apex Court more specifically on the touch stone of Article 21 of the Constitution. The said principle has been reiterated by the Apex Court in Satyendra Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, 2022

(10) SCC 51. Learned AGA for the State has not shown any exceptional circumstances which would warrant denial of bail to the applicant.

¶9No material, facts or circumstances has been shown by learned AGA for the State that the accused may tamper with the evidence or witnesses or the accused is of such character that his mere presence at large would intimidate the witnesses or that accused will use his liberty to subvert justice or tamper with the evidence.

¶10It is settled principle of law that the object of bail is to secure the attendance of the accused at the trial. No material particulars or circumstances suggestive of the applicant fleeing from justice or thwarting the course of justice or creating other troubles in the shape of repeating offences or intimidating witnesses and the like have been shown by learned AGA for the State.

¶11Learned AGA for the State has not shown any material or circumstances that the accused/applicants are not entitled to bail in larger interests of the public or State.

¶12Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, submissions of learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicants have made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶13Let the applicants, Gungai @ Laxman and Lalli, involved in Case Crime No. 19 of 2023, under sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali City, District Mirzapur, be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions:- i. The applicants will not tamper with the evidence during the trial. ii. The applicants will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness. iii. The applicants will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted and/or the applicants shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required. iv. The applicants shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which they are accused, or suspected, of the commission of which they are suspected. v. The applicants 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. vi. The applicants shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court. vii. In the event, the applicants change residential address, the applicants shall inform the court concerned about new residential address in writing.

¶14In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court. Order Date :- 1.11.2023 K.K. Maurya High Court of Judicature at Allahabad