Babi Chaudhari @ Ankit Sharma v. State of U.P

Court No. - 74 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 50583 of 2023 Applicant :- Babi Chaudhari @ Ankit Sharma Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rajeev Kumar Saxena Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

¶1Sri Abhishek Srivastava, Advocate has filed his Vakalatnama on behalf of the informant. The same is taken on record.

¶2Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Abhishek Srivastava, learned counsel for the informant and V.P. Tripathi, learned AGA for the State.

¶3The 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. 890 of 2023, under Sections 323, 307, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3/25/27 Arms Act, Police Station Kotwali Auraiya, District Auraiya, during the pendency of the trial.

¶4Counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. As per the allegations in the first information report, applicant is alleged to have fired upon the informant, the shot missed. It is contended that the applicant did not have any intent to kill the informant. The criminal history of the applicant has been explained in para 12 of the affidavit. The applicant is in jail since 04.10.2023 and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty.

¶5Learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the informant have opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid facts from the record.

¶6Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record this Court prima facie finds that in the alleged incident, no person has received any injury. At this stage, it cannot be said that the applicant had any intent to kill the informant. Further, the applicant has remained confined for almost two months and after submission of the charge-sheet there is no hope of early conclusion of trial, more so when 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 merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶7Let the applicant-Babi Chaudhari @ Ankit Sharma, involved in the aforesaid case be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties (in view of criminal history) 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. the applicant shall appear on first Sunday of every month at the Police Station concerned.

¶8In 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 Lbm/- High Court of Judicature at Allahabad