Tabrez v. State of U.P

Court No. - 74 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 44339 of 2023 Applicant :- Tabrez Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Jata Shankar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

¶1Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record.

¶2Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Neeraj Kumar Sharma, learned A.G.A. for the State-opposite party.

¶3The 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. 385 of 2023, under Sections 307, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Surajpur, District Gautam Buddha Nagar during the pendency of the trial.

¶4Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant was not named in the first information report and has been falsely implicated in the instant case. The name of the applicant was disclosed by the injured in his statement to the police. In the said statement role of catching hold has been assigned to the applicant, whereas co-accused Jitendra is alleged to have inflicted injury on the injured. The role of the applicant is clearly distinguishable to that of the named co-accused Jitendra. The criminal history of the applicant has been explained in Paragraphs-4 and 5 of the supplementary affidavit. The applicant is in jail since 07.08.2023 and if he is released on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty.

¶5Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.

¶6Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of the record, this Court prima facie finds that the applicant was not named in the first information report. In the statement of injured the role of catching hold has been assigned to the applicant. Moreover, the applicant has remained confined for more than three and half months 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.

¶7Let the applicant-Tabrez, 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.

¶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 :- 29.11.2023 SKT/- High Court of Judicature at Allahabad