Arun Yadav v. State of U.P

Court No. - 74 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 49835 of 2023 Applicant :- Arun Yadav Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rajesh Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

¶1Heard counsel for the applicant and Sri V.P. Tripathi, learned AGA for the State.

¶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. 403 of 2023, under Sections 307, 399 & 402 of I.P.C. and Section 7/25 of Arms Act, Police Station-Bardah, District-Azamgarh during pendency of the trial.

¶4Counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. It is a case of firing on the police party. No police personnel has received any injury. No recovery as alleged in the first information report was made from the applicant. There is no independent witness to the alleged recovery. It is next contended that identically placed co-accused, Monu has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated

01.12.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 48821 of 2023. The applicant claims parity. Prior to the instant case, the applicant was found involved in Case Crime No. 168 of 2022 under Sections 389 and 411 of I.P.C., Police Station-Gaurabadshahpur, District-Jaunpur. The applicant is in jail since

03.10.2023. In case he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty.

¶5Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid facts from the record.

¶6Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record this Court prima facie finds that in the alleged incident, no police personnel has received any injury. There is no independent witness to the alleged recovery. Identically placed co-accused, Monu has been granted bail by this Court. Further, the applicant has remained confined for more than two 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 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.

¶7Let the applicant, Arun Yadav, 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.

¶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 :- 13.12.2023 Sachin Mishra High Court of Judicature at Allahabad