Danish v. State of U.P

Court No. - 74 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 50491 of 2023 Applicant :- Danish Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mohd. Shahibe Alam Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

¶1Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Anupam Anand, learned Brief Holder for the State-opposite party.

¶2The instant bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. has been filed with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 817 of 2023, under Sections 307, 504, 506 I.P.C., 3/5A/8 Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act and 3/25 Arms Act, Police Station Baghpat, District Baghpat during the pendency of the trial.

¶3Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. It is a case of firing on the police party. No police personnel has received any injury in the alleged incident. Further, false recovery of cow meat has been shown from a vehicle which does not belong to the applicant. False recovery of a country made pistol and live cartridges has also been shown from the applicant. There is no independent witness to the alleged recovery. There is no FSL report to establish that the recovered meat is prohibited cow meat. The applicant is in jail since 29.10.2023 having no criminal history and if he is released on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty.

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

¶5Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of the record, this Court prima facie finds that there is no independent witness to the alleged recovery. No police personnel has received any injury. At present there is no substantive evidence to link the applicant with the offence. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. Moreover, the applicant has remained confined for almost one month and after submission of the charge-sheet there is no hope of early conclusion of trial, 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, therefore, 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-Danish, involved in the aforesaid case, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Court concerned subject to the conditions that he:

(i) shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court;

(ii) shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; and,

(iii) shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses.

¶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 SKT/- High Court of Judicature at Allahabad