Ravindra Singh v. State of U.P

Court No. - 37 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 27114 of 2023 Applicant :- Ravindra Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Arvind Agrawal Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Arpit Dube,Pulak Ganguly,Sharda Sharma Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J. This is the second bail application. By means of the bail application the applicant has prayed to be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No. 312 of 2021 at Police Station-Sirsaganj, District-Firozabad under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC. The applicant is in jail since 13.10.2022. The first bail application of the applicant was rejected by this court on 12.01.2023. The following arguments made by Sri Arvind Agrawal, learned counsel on behalf of the applicant, which could not be satisfactorily refuted by Shri Chandan Agarwal, learned AGA and Sri Pulak Ganguly, learned counsel for the informant from the record, entitle the applicant for grant of bail:

¶1The applicant is a law abiding citizen who cooperated in the investigation and has joined the trial proceedings. The applicant never tampered with the evidence nor did he influence any witness.

¶2The trial is on foot. It is also contended that all material witnesses have been examined and only formal witnesses are yet to appear in the witness box.

¶3Continued incarceration of the applicant will disable him from framing an effective defence strategy, gathering evidence in his support thereof and tendering the same before the learned trial court to absolve himself.

¶4The trial is moving at a snail's pace and and shows no sign of early conclusion. The applicant cannot be faulted for the delay in the trial.

¶5Inordinate delay in concluding trial has lead to virtually an indefinite imprisonment of the applicant, without any evidence.

¶6The right of the applicant to speedy trial has been violated.

¶7The applicant does not have any criminal history apart from this case.

¶8The applicant is not a flight risk. The applicant being a law abiding citizen has always cooperated with the investigation and undertakes to cooperate with the court proceedings. There is no possibility of his influencing witnesses, tampering with the evidence or reoffending. This Court in Prabhat Gangwar v. State of U.P. (Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.2586 of 2023) while considering the grant of enlarging an accused on bail for preparing his defence and gathering evidence to tender the same before the learned trial court for establishing his innocence held: "Nature and gravity of the offence is certainly liable to be considered by the court while considering grant of bail. The Court has also to factor the likelihood of whether the accused committed the offence while deciding a bail application. The court also has to determine in the facts of the case whether the accused needs to be set at liberty to frame his defence and gather evidence to refute the prosecution case and establish his innocence. The bail court has to examine whether continued incarceration would disable the accused from tendering an effective defence of his case. This is a demand of processual fairness in criminal jurisprudence. Setting an accused at liberty at large on this ground cannot be applied mechanically in all cases. The issue has to be considered in the facts and circumstances of each case while doing so. All relevant facts including the evidences in the record, the conduct of the accused during the investigation as well as trial have to be adverted to before a decision is made in this regard." Considering the aforesaid parameters in light of the above facts of this case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled for bail. In wake of the preceding discussion and without making any observations on the merits of the case, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant-Ravindra Singh be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number, on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below. The following conditions be imposed in the interest of justice:-

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence or influence any witness during the trial.

(ii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted. In case the learned trial court deems that the applicant is impeding the trial in any manner it may record a finding to this effect. Order Date :- 22.11.2023 Pravin High Court of Judicature at Allahabad