Rajendra v. State of U.P

Court No. - 74 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 49419 of 2023 Applicant :- Rajendra Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Pradyumn Kumar 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. 531 of 2022, under Sections 419, 420, 506, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC, Police Station Kurawali, District Mainpuri, during the pendency of trial.

¶3Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. The applicant is neither the seller nor purchaser nor witness of the alleged sale-deed. No amount has been credited in the account of the applicant. The applicant is not a beneficiary of the illicit transaction. The applicant has no concern with the disputed land. Criminal history of the applicant has been explained in para 21 of the affidavit. The applicant is in jail since 03.06.2023 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 is neither seller nor purchaser nor witness of the alleged sale-deed. No amount has been credited in the account of the applicant. At this stage, there is no substantive evidence against the applicant. 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 Rajendra, 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 :- 21.11.2023 Lbm/- High Court of Judicature at Allahabad