Niranjan Kumar v. State of U.P

Court No. - 75 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 47037 of 2023 Applicant :- Niranjan Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Satwik Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Umesh Chandra Sharma,J.

¶1Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶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. 02 of 2022 under Sections 417, 420, 467, 468, 471, 411, 120-B I.P.C., Section 66C, 66 D of the I.T. Act, Section 36 and 42 of the Aadhar Act, Police Station-Cyber Crime, District-Varansi, during the pendency of the trial.

¶3Counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. The applicant is neither named in the F.I.R. nor has he any nexus with the alleged incident or with the mobile number mentioned in the F.I.R. The applicant is a student of B.A. 2nd Year and is suffering from neurological ailment. There is no independent witness of the alleged mobile phones and PAN Card. It is next contended that the co-accused Chandan Sagar Urf Chanan Kumar, Sushil Kumar and Pankaj Kumar Yadav, having identical role, have been granted bail by this court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 43267 of 2022, 41173 of 2023 and 38803 of 2023 vide orders dated 19.10.2022,

22.9.2023 and 20.9.2023. The applicant claims parity. The applicant has been granted bail in Case Crime No. 05 of 2022 lodged after this case except that there is no criminal antecedent of the applicant. The applicant is in jail since 21.08.2023. 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 regard to the submissions made above and the fact that the applicant has remained confined for more than three months, and after submission of the charge-sheet, there is no hope of early conclusion of trial, more so when co-accused persons have been granted bail and no reasonable apprehension has been brought to the fore by the State that the applicant, if enlarged on bail, would either temper 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-Niranjan Kumar, involved in aforesaid case 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 the conditions that he:

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

(ii) shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence;

(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 :- 29.11.2023 S.Verma High Court of Judicature at Allahabad