Akhileh Yadav @ Nathuni v. State of U.P

Court No. - 74 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 28189 of 2023 Applicant :- Akhileh Yadav @ Nathuni Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Gyan Babu Pal,Rajeev Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

¶1Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record.

¶2Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri N.K. Sharma, learned A.G.A. for the State-opposite party, and perused the record.

¶3The instant bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. has been filed with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in S.T. No. 137 of 2016, arising out of Case Crime No. 682 of 2016, under Section 3/25 Arms Act, Police Station Robertsganj, District Sonbhadra during the pendency of the trial.

¶4Learned counsel for the applicant submits that earlier the applicant was granted bail by the trial Court on 04.08.2016. Though the applicant participated in the trial for a considerable period, the trial could not conclude and at the same time due to unavoidable reasons the applicant had left the station to earn livelihood. As such the applicant was reported to have absconded and has surrendered again on 15.04.2023 and since then he is in jail. Learned counsel for the applicant on the basis of instructions submits that if the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall appear regularly before the court below and shall not leave the station without permission of the court concerned.

¶5Learned A.G.A. 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 the applicant had earlier appeared and contested the proceedings, however, the trial could not conclude and further the applicant has presently remained confined for almost eight months and 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 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-Akhileh Yadav @ Nathuni, 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:

¶1shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court;

¶2shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; and,

¶3shall 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 :- 12.12.2023 SKT/- High Court of Judicature at Allahabad