Rahul Vaid v. State of U.P

Court No. - 74 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 52895 of 2023 Applicant :- Rahul Vaid Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Anand Ji Mishra,Kaushal Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

¶1Heard learned Counsel for the applicant and Sri Shashank Shekhar, learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶2The 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. 137 of 2023, under Sections 392, 411, 120-B I.P.C., Police Station-Kotwali, District-Meerut, during pendency of the trial.

¶3Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant was not named in the first information report. The applicant was arrested on 24.08.2023 in Case Crime No. 84 of 2023, under Section 307 IPC and Section 3/25, 5/27 Arms Act, Police Station Railway Road, District Meerut alongwith other co-accused persons and has been falsely implicated in the instant case. False recovery of a country made pistol has been shown from the applicant. There is no independent witness to the alleged recovery. Recovery of Indian Currency of Rs. 3,00,000/- has also been shown from the applicant. The said amount belongs to him. No test identification parade was got conducted by the police authorities. In Case Crime No. 84 of 2023, the applicant has been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 05.12.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 50905 of 2023. At this stage, there is no cogent evidence to link the applicant with the offence. Prior to the instant case, the applicant does not have any criminal history, however, after his arrest in the instant case, he has been implicated in other cases. The applicant is in jail since

24.08.2023 and in case he is enlarged 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 counsel for the parties and having perused the record, this Court prima facie finds that the applicant was not named in the first information report. He was arrested in Case Crime No. 84 of 2023, under Section 307 IPC and Section 3/25, 5/27 Arms Act, Police Station Railway Road, District Meerut alongwith other co-accused persons and has been implicated in the instant case. In the said case he has been enlarged on bail. There is no independent witness to the recovery. At this stage, there is no substantive evidence against him. The applicant has remained confined for more than three months 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 the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶6Let the applicant, Rahul Vaid, 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 :- 11.12.2023 Lbm/- High Court of Judicature at Allahabad