Rajesh v. State of U.P. and Another

Court No. - 74 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 45455 of 2023 Applicant :- Rajesh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Vinay Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

¶1Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Neeraj Kumar Sharma, learned AGA for the State-respondent.

¶2The instant bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. has been filed with a prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case No. 834 of 2019, arising out of Case Crime No. 144 of 2019, under Sections 323, 504, 308, 324 IPC, Police Station Bela, District Auraiya, during the pendency of trial.

¶3Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. As per the allegations in the first information report, three persons including the applicant are alleged to have assaulted the informant (Ramesh Chandra), his brother Dinesh and his sister Rekha. As per the medical report, the injured Ramesh Chandra and Rekha received injuries, which are simple in nature, whereas the injured Dinesh sustained a fracture on the parietal bone and rest of the injures were found simple in nature. It is contended that author of the injury caused on the head of the injured Dinesh is not known. A vague and general role has been assigned to the applicant. The applicant has not been nominated as the principal offender, who caused the injury on the head of injured Dinesh. Even, in the statement of injured Dinesh, he has not nominated the applicant as the principal offender, who caused the head injury. The applicant is in jail since 05.08.2023 having no criminal history and in case he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty.

¶4Learned AGA 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 a vague and general role has been assigned to the applicant. The applicant has not been nominated as the principal offender, who caused the injury on the head of Dinesh. At this stage there is no clarity with regard to the role of the applicant. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. Further, the applicant has remained confined for more than three 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 Rajesh, involved in the 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; and,

(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 :- 16.11.2023 Lbm/- High Court of Judicature at Allahabad