Khijar @ Monu v. State of U.P

Court No. - 74 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 10924 of 2023 Applicant :- Khijar @ Monu Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Virendra Kumar Jaiswal,Ajay Kumar Pandey,Vivek Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

¶1Rejoinder affidavit to the counter affidavit filed by the learned A.G.A. for the State is taken on record.

¶2Heard counsel for the applicant, Sri Neeraj Kumar Sharma, learned AGA for the State-opposite party and perused the record.

¶3The instant bail application, under Section 439 Cr.P.C., has been filed with a prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 57 of 2023, under Section 5/25 of Arms Act, Police Station-Babugarh, District-Hapur, during the pendency of trial.

¶4Counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. False recovery of country made pistols has been shown from the applicant. There is no independent witness to the alleged recovery. It is next contended that identically placed co-accused, Jamshaid & Naukhej, have been granted bail by this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 12916 of 2023 & 12699 of 2023 vide orders dated 6.04.2023 & 12.04.2023 respectively. The applicant claims parity. The criminal history of the applicant has been explained in paragraph no. 4 of the rejoinder affidavit. The applicant is in jail since

07.02.2023 and in case he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty.

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

¶6Having heard counsel for the parties and having perused the record, this Court prima facie finds that there is no independent witness to the recovery. Identically placed co-accused, Jamshaid & Naukhej, have been granted bail by this Court. Further, the applicant has remained confined for ten months 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, 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-Khijar @ Monu 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 the court concerned subject to conditions that he:

(i) shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court;

(ii) shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence;

(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 :- 7.12.2023 Aditya High Court of Judicature at Allahabad