Indrish v. State of U.P

Court No. - 74 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 47112 of 2023 Applicant :- Indrish Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Pawankumar Dubey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

¶1Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Vinod Kumar Tiwari, learned A.G.A. for the State-opposite party.

¶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. 494 of 2023, under Sections 3/5/8 Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act, Police Station Nigohi, District Shahjahanpur during the pendency of the trial.

¶3Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. The applicant was not arrested at the spot. The applicant was nominated in the first information report in pursuance of the statement of co-accused Sikander Ali, Reshma and Suraiya made before the police authorities. The said statements, insofar as they implicate the applicant, are unreliable. No recovery of any cow meat or other incriminating article has been made from the applicant. It is next contended that co-accused Suraiya, who was arrested at the spot, has been granted bail by this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 44486 of 2023, Suraiya v. State of U.P., vide order dated 30.10.2023. The applicant claims parity. The applicant is in jail since 19.09.2023 having no criminal history and if he is released 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 learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of the record, this Court prima facie finds that the applicant was not arrested at the spot and no recovery of any cow meat or other incriminating article has been made from the applicant. Co-accused Suraiya has been granted bail by this Court. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. Moreover, the applicant has remained confined for almost two months and after submission of the charge-sheet there is no hope of early conclusion of trial, 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, therefore, 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-Indrish, 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 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 :- 17.11.2023 SKT/- High Court of Judicature at Allahabad