Varun Bhati v. State of U.P

Court No. - 64 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 37417 of 2023 Applicant :- Varun Bhati Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Jai Prakash Singh,Abhishek Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,S.A.Imam Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶1List has been revised.

¶2Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A for the State.

¶3This is second bail application of the applicant. The first bail application of the applicant was rejected on 16.11.2019 by a coordinate Bench of this Court, which is on record.

¶4As per FIR, the informant's brother went missing in the morning of 16.05.2019 regarding which a missing report was lodged at the police station. When he reached village, Anuj told him that at about 9.30 p.m. the deceased along with applicant and three other co-accused were seen by him in a Honda Amaze Car and on that basis it was alleged that these accused have committed murder of his brother and his dead body has been concealed. The FIR was lodged on 16.05.2019 at 11.09 p.m..

¶5Counsel for the applicant submits that before the trial court, two out of 23 prosecution witnesses have now been examined, whose statements have been brought on record by way of supplementary affidavit. Both of them have been declared as hostile. The applicant is in jail since 17.05.2019 and has no criminal history to his credit.

¶6On the other hand learned A.G.A and learned counsel for the informant have opposed the prayer for bail, but they could not dispute the submissions urged by learned counsel for the applicant.

¶7Keeping 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 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.

¶8Let the applicant-Varun Bhati, involved in Case Crime No.202 of 2019, under sections 302 and 201 I.P.C., Police Station-Ecotech-3, District Gautambudh Nagar, 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 the evidence or threaten the witnesses.

(ii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when 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.

(iii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

(iv) In case the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation then the Trial Court shall initiate proceedings against him in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

(v) The 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 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.

¶10Identity and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

¶11Trial court is directed to conclude the trial of the applicant as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of one year.

¶12Registrar (compliance) is directed to communicate this order to the trial Court for necessary compliance within ten days. Order Date :- 4.12.2023 Saif High Court of Judicature at Allahabad