Aabad v. State of U.P

Court No. - 74 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 44475 of 2023 Applicant :- Aabad Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sushil Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

¶1Supplementary affidavit filed by counsel for the applicant is taken on record.

¶2Heard learned Counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State-respondent.

¶3The 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. 388 of 2023, under Section 307 IPC, Section 3/25/27 of Arms Act, Section 3/11 of Animal Cruelty Act and Section 3/5/8 of Cow Slaughter Act Police Station-Budhana, District-Muzaffar Nagar, during pendency of the trial.

4.Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is a case of firing on the police party. No police personnel has received any injury. In fact, it is the applicant who has received injury on his right leg. False recovery of live stock, a country made pistol, two live cartridges and instruments & tools used for slaughtering has been shown from the applicant. There is no independent witness to the recovery. The criminal history of the applicant has been explained in paragraph no. 3 of the supplementary affidavit. The applicant is in jail since 27.08.2023 and in case he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty.

¶5Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily d1ispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.

¶6Having heard counsel for the parties and having perused the record, this Court prima facie finds that no police personal has received any injury. There is no independent witness to the alleged recovery. At present, there is no substantive evidence against the applicant. Further, the applicant has remained confined for more than two months and 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.

¶7Let the applicant-Aabad, 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.

¶8In 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 :- 6.11.2023 Sachin Mishra High Court of Judicature at Allahabad