Gorey @ Arjun v. State of U.P

RESERVED ON 23.11.2023 DELIVERED ON 30.11.2023 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 50108 of 2023 Applicant :- Gorey @ Arjun Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Chandra Prakash Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Kamlakar Pal,Sakshi Srivastava Hon'ble Siddharth,J. Heard Shri Chandra Prakash Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant; Shri Kamlakar Pal, learned counsel for the informant and Shri Gyan Narayan Kanaujiya, learned A.G.A-I for the State. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Gorey @ Arjun, with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 304 of 2023, under Sections 147,148,149,352,302 IPC Police Station Bidhnoo, District-Kanpur Nagar, during pendency of trial.

There is allegation in the First Information Report that father of the informant,namely, Shri Ram Pandey and his cousin, Rewati Raman Pandey were going on motorcycle on 2.7.2023 at about 10.30. P.M.In the way they met co-accused, Pramod Dubey alias Lala and his son Prateek alias Bhuara, Kallu and applicant, Gorey @ Arjun and 3-4 unknown persons who stopped them in the way. The father of the informant, Shri Ram Pandey, was earlier Pradhan Pati and the aforesaid accused persons had enmity with him regarding possession over Government land.His father had asked them to vacate the aforesaid land.On account of the aforesaid enmity they attacked his father and murdered him while his cousin, Reoti Raman Pandey, who was injured, ran away and saved his life . Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that applicant has been falsely implicated because he is son-in-law of co-accused, Pramod Dubey alias Lala.The incident took place on 2.7.2023 at about 22.30 hours but the First Information Report was registered on the next day i.e.,

3.7.2023.The eyewitness, Rewati Raman, claims himself to be eye witness but he did not informed any one about the incident seen by him. They had enmity with Pramod Dubey and informant was not present in the scene of incident. There is no evidence of same in the form of any call details or CCTV footage. Rewati Raman was questioned by the investigating officer as to why he did not informed about the incident when he was eye witness on the same day but he could not submit any reply. He has submitted that applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. He is in jail since 21.6.2023 and has no criminal history.

Learned counsel for the informant has vehemently opposed the bail application of the applicant and has submitted that deceased was brutally murdered by all the accused persons. However he could not dispute the other submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant but could not dispute the aforesaid facts. 2 of 4 Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused; submissions of the learned counsel for the parties noted above; finding force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant; keeping view the uncertainty regarding conclusion of trial; one sided investigation by police, ignoring the case of accused side; applicant being under-trial having fundamental right to speedy trial; larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India; considering the dictum of Apex Court in the recent judgment dated 11.07.2022 of the Apex Court in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil vs. C.B.I., passed in S.L.P (Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021; considering 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above their capacity by the under trials and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed Let the applicant 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 following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶1The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.

¶2The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment. 3 of 4

¶3The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶4That the applicant shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

¶5The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence and the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law to ensure presence of the applicant.

¶6The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court default of this condition is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. Order Date :- 30.11.2023 Atul kr. sri. 4 of 4 High Court of Judicature at Allahabad