Durgpal v. State of U.P

Court No. - 72 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 51137 of 2023 Applicant :- Durgpal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Amit Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Arvind Kumar Verma Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶1List has been revised.

¶2Heard Sri Amit Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Deepak Kumar Verma, Advocate holding brief of Sri A.K Verma, learned counsel for the informant, Sri Pankaj Verma, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record.

¶3Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 171 of 2023, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323 & 307 IPC, Police Station Refinery, District Mathura, during the pendency of trial.

¶4As per prosecution case, the named accused persons Shyam, Rammo, Mahaveer, Vikram, Subhash and Girraj and applicant are stated to have come to the house of the informant. The co-accused person Ravi is stated to have fired at Lal Singh s/o Jasso thereby causing gun shot injury to him on 03.06.2023. Subsequently, it is written in the FIR that it was the applicant who had fired at Lal Singh.

¶5Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case with a view to cause unnecessary harassment and to victimize him. FIR itself is contradictory. At one place, it is mentioned that it was Shyam who has fired at the injured person and at the other it is stated that it was the applicant who had fired. Learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that the statement of the injured was recorded under Section 161 CrPC by the Investigating Officer and he has levelled general allegations against all the accused persons. He has not assigned the role of firing to any of the accused persons. Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicant to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against him. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicant have also been touched upon at length. It is further stated that there is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since

21.08.2023. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶6Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application.

¶7Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, 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.

¶8Let the applicant-Durgpal, who is involved in aforementioned case crime 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.

(i) The applicant shall not tamper with evidence.

(ii) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the Trial Court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the Trial Court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶9In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶10It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses. Order Date :- 30.11.2023 Priya High Court of Judicature at Allahabad