Sonu Sharma @ Billaiya v. State of U.P

Court No. - 72 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 47278 of 2023 Applicant :- Sonu Sharma @ Billaiya Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ajay Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Afzal Ahmad Khan Durrani Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶1List has been revised.

¶2Heard Sri Ajay Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri D.K. Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record.

¶3Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 0421 of 2023, under Sections 392, 341, 323, 411, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Fatehgarh Kotwali, District Farrukhabad,, during the pendency of trial.

¶4As per prosecution story, applicant along with co-accused persons is stated to have barged into the house of the informant and assaulted the family members besides robbing them of their ornaments and Rs.28,000/- cash on 14.08.2023 at about 2:00 P.M.

¶5Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that he has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has criminal history of 25 cases assigned to him; in four cases, period of externment has already expired and and in other four cases, he is not named and in the rest cases, he has annexed bail orders. Learned counsel for the applicant has further states that FIR is delayed by eighth days and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. The said recovery of golden chain and cash has been fastened on him at the behest of the informant, as such, the applicant is entitled for bail.

¶6Learned counsel has place reliance on 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. 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 23.08.2023. 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-Sonu Sharma @ Billaiya, 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 Mukesh Kr. (Krishan Pahal,J.) High Court of Judicature at Allahabad