Sudhanshu v. State of U.P

Court No. - 72 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 48837 of 2023 Applicant :- Sudhanshu Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sunil Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶1List has been revised.

¶2Heard Sri Sunil Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Deepak Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record.

¶3Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 196 of 2023, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 504, 506, 307 IPC & Sections 9(1)

(A)/25(2)/27 Arms Act & 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1932, Police Station Bahsuma, District Meerut, during the pendency of trial.

¶4As per prosecution story, the police found two groups fighting with each other and were involved in firing and brick batting etc. on 14.10.2023.

¶5Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that applicant was at the barber shop, was assaulted by co-accused Akshay. The applicant is the only person who has sustained injury. Applicant himself is a victim but he has been made an accused in the present case. No injury has been sustained by any other person whatsoever. No private person has instituted any FIR whatsoever. The criminal history of the applicant of one case has been explained wherein he was enlarged on bail by the court concerned and in Crime No. 89 of 2019, under Sections 147, 148, 324, 504, 506 IPC, P.S. Bahsuma, District Meerut, the applicant did not apply for bail as the said offence are minor and bailable. Learned counsel has place reliance upon the judgment of Prabhakar Tewari vs. State of U.P. and another, 2020 (11) SCC 648, wherein, the Apex Court has observed that pendency of several criminal cases against an accused itself cannot be a basis for refusal of bail, if otherwise his case for bail is made out. The applicant is languishing in jail since 19.10.2023. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶6Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application.

¶7Considering 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.

¶8Let the applicant-Sudhanshu, 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.

¶9In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶10It 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 Mukesh Kr. (Krishan Pahal,J.) High Court of Judicature at Allahabad