Suraj Prajapati v. State of U.P

Court No. - 72 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 47216 of 2023 Applicant :- Suraj Prajapati Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rakesh Kumar Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶1List has been revised.

¶2Heard Sri Rakesh Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri V.K.S. Parmar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record.

¶3Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.0182 of 2021, under Sections 147, 148, 149 and 307 I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali, District Jhansi, during the pendency of trial.

¶4As per prosecution story, the named accused persons, namely, Nirmal Yadav, Anuj Yadav, Harsh Sahu and some 4-5 unknown persons, are stated to have fired indiscriminately at Sangam Tiwari on 23.04.2021 at about 5:30 p.m. No firearm injury is stated to have been sustained by the victim Sangam Tiwari.

¶5Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case with a view to cause unnecessary harassment and to victimize him. He is not named in the FIR. Even his name has not come up in the statement of the witnesses. The name of the applicant has come up on the basis of having been seen involved in recce in the CCTV footage.

¶6Learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that the named accused person Nirmal Yadav has been enlarged on regular bail by this Court passed vide order dated 12.08.2021 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.24915 of 2021. The case of the applicant is at a better footing to the co-accused person Nirmal Yadav. Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicant to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against him. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicant have also been touched upon at length. The applicant is languishing in jail since 14.09.2023. The criminal history assigned to the applicant stands explained in paragraph 9-A of the affidavit accompanying the bail application. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶7Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application.

¶8Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, 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.

¶9Let the applicant-Suraj Prajapati, who is involved in aforementioned case crime 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 evidence.

(ii) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the Trial Court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) 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.

¶10In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶11It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses. Order Date :- 24.11.2023 Ravi Kant (Krishan Pahal, J.) High Court of Judicature at Allahabad