Rajeev v. State of U.P

Court No. - 74 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 50806 of 2023 Applicant :- Rajeev Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sunil Kumar Dwivedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

¶1Heard counsel for the applicant and Sri V.P. Tripathi, learned A.G.A. for the State-respondent.

¶2The instant bail application, under Section 439 Cr.P.C., has been filed with a prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 538 of 2023 under Section 392 and 411 of I.P.C., Police Station-Kotwali Dehat, District-Bulandshahar, during pendency of the trial.

3.Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant was not named in the first information report. The applicant was arrested on 27.09.2023 and has been falsely implicated in the present case. False recovery of a country made pistol, a live cartridge and ornaments of yellow and white metals has been shown from the applicant. There is no independent witness to the recovery. Recovery of Indian currency of Rs. 3,100/- has also been shown from the applicant. The said amount belongs to him. The recovered articles cannot be connected with the offence. The criminal history of the applicant has been explained in para no. 5 of the supplementary affidavit. The applicant is in jail since 27.09.2023 and in case he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty.

¶4Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.

¶5Having heard counsel for the parties and having perused the record, this Court prima facie finds that the applicant was not named in the first information report. There is no independent witness to the alleged recovery. At this stage, there is no substantive evidence against the applicant. Further, the applicant has remained confined for two months and no reasonable apprehension has been brought to the fore by the State that the applicant, if enlarged on bail, would either tamper with the evidence or delay the trial or intimidate the witness, without commenting on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶6Let the applicant-Rajeev, involved in the aforesaid case be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned on the following conditions that: i. the applicant shall not temper with the prosecution evidence; ii. the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witness; iii. the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court; and, iv. shall appear on the first Sunday of every month at the Police Station concerned.

¶7In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court. Order Date :- 28.11.2023 Sachin Mishra High Court of Judicature at Allahabad