Rohit v. State of U.P

Court No. - 69 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 50520 of 2023 Applicant :- Rohit Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rajesh Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.

¶1List revised.

¶2Heard Sri Rajesh Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Santosh Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the State and perused the material on record.

¶3This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant-Rohit, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 283 of 2023, under Sections 364, 302, 201, 34 I.P.C., Police Station Trans Yamuna, District Agra.

¶4The first information report of the present matter was lodged on 01.08.2023 by Pramod Kumar against the applicant, Anil, Vishal and Vishal's friend Sandeep Yadav alleging therein that on 27.07.2023 at about 8.30 p.m. his brother talked on phone to someone and went away stating that he would return back within 10 minutes. He did not return back. On 28.07.2023 a missing report was lodged. Later on he came to know that Anil was to give Rs. Two lakhs to his brother and was asked many times but he did not return it. The accused persons have threatened him twice on asking for money. There is a dispute with regards to money of the accused persons with his brother.

¶5Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is argued that as per the prosecution case itself, the deceased Vinod Kumar was having some dispute with Anil with regards to money. It is argued that the applicant has no motive to commit the aforesaid offence. It is argued that there is a delay of about 04 days in lodging of the first information report which is unexplained. It is further argued that the name of the applicant is not mentioned in missing report lodged by informant on 28.07.2023. It is argued that there is no recovery of any incriminating material either from the possession or pointing out of the applicant. It is argued that co-accused Vishal and Sandeep Yadav have been granted bail by co-ordinate Benches of this Court vide orders dated 09.11.2023 and 17.11.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 48303 of 2023 and 47300 of 2023, the copy of the said orders have been produced before the Court which are taken on record. The applicant has no criminal history as stated in para 25 of the affidavit and is in jail since 02.08.2023.

¶6Per contra, learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail.

¶7After having heard learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is evident that the implication of the applicant is on the basis of suspicion only. Co-accused Vishal and Sandeep Yadav have been granted bail by co-ordinate Benches of this Court.

¶8Looking to the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence, this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

¶9Let the applicant-Rohit, 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 concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

i) The applicant will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever.

ii) The applicant will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.

(iii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the date fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

(iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever. In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under section 82 Cr.P.C., may be issued and if applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under section 174-A I.P.C.

(v) 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 and the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A IPC.

(vi) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the applicant.

¶10The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

¶11The bail application is allowed. Order Date :- 28.11.2023 AS Rathore (Samit Gopal,J.) High Court of Judicature at Allahabad