Ayush @ Ashish @ Chhotu v. State of U.P

Court No. - 74 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 49083 of 2023 Applicant :- Ayush @ Ashish @ Chhotu Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Dhiraj Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

¶1Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri V.P.Tripathi, 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 Crime No. 303 of 2023, under Sections 392, 411 IPC, Police Station Karhal, District Mainpuri, during the pendency of trial.

¶3Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant was not named in the first information report. The applicant alongwith another co-accused Rahul @ Gurujeet Singh was arrested in Case Crime No. 116 of 2023, under Sections 2/25 Arms Act, Section 41, 102 Cr.P.C. and Section 411, 413 IPC, Police Station Barnahal, District Mainpuri and has been falsely implicated in the instant case. False recovery of a bag containing a ladies purse and an Aadhar card has been shown from the applicant. There is no independent witness to the alleged recovery. The recovery of Indian currency of Rs. 500/- belongs to the applicant. No test identification parade was got conducted by the police authorities. Identically placed co-accused Rahul @ Gurujeet Singh @ Panchabi has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated

09.08.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 33893 of 2023. The applicant claims parity. Criminal history of the applicant has been explained in para 18 of the affidavit. The applicant is in jail since 09.06.2023 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 the applicant was not named in the FIR. There is no independent witness to the alleged recovery. Identically placed co-accused Rahul @ Gurujeet Singh @ Panchabi has been granted bail by this Court. Further, the applicant has remained confined for more than five 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 Ayush @ Ashish @ Chhotu, 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 :- 20.11.2023 Lbm/- High Court of Judicature at Allahabad