Raju Alias Raj Kumar v. State of U.P

Court No. - 74 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 52665 of 2023 Applicant :- Raju Alias Raj Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rajendra Kumar Misra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

¶1Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Neeraj Kumar Sharma, 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. 353 of 2020, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 324, 325, 307, 447 I.P.C., Police Station Chhaprauil, District Baghpat, during the pendency of the trial.

¶3Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. In the first information report, 25 named accused persons including the applicant and 25 unknown persons are nominated. A vague and general role has been assigned to the applicant. The applicant has not been nominated as principal offender, who caused the injuries to the injured persons. It is next contended that identically placed co-accused Ramesh and Bhopal have been granted bail by this Court vide orders dated 13.04.2023 and

08.05.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 15145 of 2023 and 17812 of 2023. The applicant claims parity. The applicant is in jail since 20.11.2023 having no criminal history and in case 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 having perused the record this Court prima facie finds that a vague and general role has been assigned to the applicant. The applicant has not been nominated as the principal offender who caused injuries to the injured persons. Identically placed co-accused Ramesh and Bhopal have been granted bail by this Court. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. Further, the applicant has remained confined for almost a month and after submission of the charge-sheet there is no hope of early conclusion of trial, more so when 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 merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶6Let the applicant-Raju @ Raj Kumar, involved in the aforesaid case be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned on the following conditions that: i. the applicant shall not temper with the prosecution evidence; ii. the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witness; and, iii. the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court.

¶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 :- 8.12.2023 Lbm/- High Court of Judicature at Allahabad