Pawan Kumar v. State of U.P

Court No. - 64 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 57439 of 2022 Applicant :- Pawan Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rahul Gaur,Suhas Subhash Mehta Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Abou Sofian Usmani,Mahendra Kumar Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶1Heard Sri Rahul Gaur, learned counsel for the applicant; Sri Abou Sofian Usmani, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A for the State.

¶2This is second bail application of the applicant.

¶3The first bail application of the applicant was rejected on

11.10.2022 by this court directing the trial court to conclude the trial against the applicant within period of one year.

¶4Counsel for the applicant submits that 9 prosecution witnesses have been examined and trial will take time to conclude since the statement of accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C and defence evidence would be recorded. The applicant is in jail since

01.05.2020 and he has no earlier criminal history and has been subsequently implicated in this case after the present implication. He has further submitted that the witnesses of fact have already been examined. There is no possibility of tampering with the witnesses of facts.

¶5Per contra, counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A have opposed the submission. Counsel for the informant has stated that now only one prosecution witness remains to be examined. There is no justification for enlarging the applicant on bail at this stage.

¶6After hearing the rival contentions, this Court finds that this is the first implication of the applicant. He is already in jail since

01.05.2020. Trial will take time to conclude. The order of this court has not been complied by the trial court.

¶7Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused; submissions of the learned counsel for the parties noted above; finding force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant; keeping view the uncertainty regarding conclusion of trial; one sided investigation by police, ignoring the case of accused side; applicant being under-trial having fundamental right to speedy trial; larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India; considering the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil vs. C.B.I., passed in S.L.P (Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021; considering 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above their capacity by the under trials and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶8Let the applicant, Pawan Kumar, involved in Case Crime No. 98 of 2020, under Sections-302, 120-B IPC, Police Station-Naseerpur, District-Firozabad, 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 following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.

(ii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in Court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

(iii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

(iv) In case the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation then the Trial Court shall initiate proceedings against him in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

(v) The applicant shall remain present in person before the Trial Court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the Trial Court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶9In case, of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶10Identity and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

¶11Trial court is directed to conclude the trial of the applicant as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of three months.

¶12Registrar (compliance) is directed to communicate this order to the trial Court for necessary compliance within ten days. Order Date :- 17.11.2023 Rohit High Court of Judicature at Allahabad