Dablu Anuruddh v. State of U.P

Court No. - 74 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 53671 of 2023 Applicant :- Dablu Anuruddh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Manish Kumar Tiwari,Amit Kumar Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

¶1Heard counsel for the applicant and Sri V.P. Tripathi, learned A.G.A. for the State-respondent.

¶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. 187 of 2020 under Sections 147, 332, 353, 308, 323, 34 & 325 of I.P.C. and Section 7 of Criminal Law Amendment Act, Police Station-Civil Line, District-Etawah, during pendency of the trial.

3.Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. In the first information report, nine persons, including the applicant, and 15-20 inmates are nominated. A vague and general role has been assigned to the applicant. The applicant has not been nominated as the principal offender who caused the injuries to the injured persons. The applicant did not indulge in any act of violence. It is next contended that identically placed co-accused, Ankit Yadav @ Fauji and Munna Khalid, have been granted bail by this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 49066 of 2020 and 2285 of 2023 vide orders dated 05.01.2021 and 18.01.2023 respectively. The applicant claims parity. The criminal history of the applicant has been explained in para no. 18 of the bail application. The applicant is in jail since 04.04.2020 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 a vague and general role has been assigned to the applicant. The applicant has not been nominated as the principal offender who caused the injuries to the injured persons. Identically placed co-accused, Ankit Yadav @ Fauji and Munna Khalid, have been granted bail by this Court. Further, the applicant has remained confined for more than three years and eight 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.

¶6Let the applicant-Dablu Anuruddh, 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 :- 14.12.2023 Sachin Mishra High Court of Judicature at Allahabad