Neeraj v. State of U.P

Court No. - 74 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 52040 of 2023 Applicant :- Neeraj Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ajay Kumar Mishra,Shashank Pathak Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

¶1Heard counsel for the applicant and Sri Prateek Tyagi, learned A.G.A. for the State-opposite party.

¶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.507 of 2023, under Sections 411, 420, 467, 468 and 471 of I.P.C., Section 4/5 of Explosive Act and Sections 60 and 72 of Excise Act, Police Station Meja, District-Prayagraj, during the pendency of the trial.

¶3Counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. False recovery of illicit liquor, Q.R.codes and fake caps has been shown from the possession of the co-accused, Vikki @ Akash. The co-accused, Vikki was the pillion rider of the motorcycle driven by the applicant. There is no independent witness to the alleged recovery. There is no F.S.L. report to establish that the liquor recovered is spurious or obnoxious. Prior to the instant case the applicant does not have any criminal history, however after his arrest he has been implicated in other cases. The applicant is in jail since 21.10.2023 and if he is released 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 heard learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of the record, this Court prima facie finds that there is no independent witness to the alleged recovery. At this stage, there is no substantive evidence that the applicant. Further, the applicant has remained confined for more than one month 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.

¶6Let the applicant-Neeraj, 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.

¶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 :- 5.12.2023 Sachin Mishra High Court of Judicature at Allahabad