Shanu v. State of U.P

Court No. - 74 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 41949 of 2023 Applicant :- Shanu Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Jag Narayan,Sushil Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

¶1Counter affidavit on behalf of the State filed by learned AGA, is taken on record.

¶2Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Neeraj Kumar Sharma, learned A.G.A. for the State-opposite party.

¶3The 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. 250 of 2023, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 452 323, 307, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Thathiya, District Kannauj, during the pendency of the trial.

¶4Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. As per the allegations in the first information report, 12 persons including the applicant are alleged to have assaulted four persons. A vague and general role has been assigned to the applicant. The applicant has not been nominated as principal offender, who caused injury to four injured. It is next contended that charge sheet has been filed against the applicant under Sections 147, 148, 149, 452, 323, 324, 325, 504, 506 IPC. It is further contended that identically placed co-accused Amir and Khushnoor have been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 22.09.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 39687 of 2023. The applicant claims parity. The applicant is in jail since 22.07.2023 having no criminal history and if he is released on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty.

¶5Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record this Court prima facie finds that the a vague and general role has been assigned to the applicant. The applicant has not been nominated as the principal offender who caused injury to four injured. Identically placed co-accused Amir and Khushnoor have been granted bail by this Court. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. Further, the applicant has remained confined for more than four months 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, without commenting on merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶6Let the applicant-Shanu, involved in the aforesaid case be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned on the following conditions that: i. the applicant shall not temper with the prosecution evidence; ii. the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witness; and, iii. the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court.

¶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 :- 22.11.2023 Lbm/- High Court of Judicature at Allahabad