Anil Kumar v. State of U.P

Reserved On:- 30.10.2023

Delivered On:- 01.11.2023 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 10020 of 2023 Applicant :- Anil Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Manvendra Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Raksha Chauhan,Upendra Kumar Singh Hon'ble Siddharth, J.

¶1Heard Sri Manvendra Singh, learned counsel for the applicant; Sri Upendra Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the informant; learned A.G.A for the State and perused the material placed on record.

¶2There is allegation in the FIR that on 12.01.2022 between 01:00 to 03:00 a.m in the night, unknown persons came on the upper floor of the home of informant where the wife of children of the informant were sleeping in a room. Younger brother of the informant was also sleeping in another small room. Father was sleeping in the verandah. Miscreants bolted the rooms from outside. They broke the laches and locks of the stairs and also two iron almirahs. They looted ornaments of about Rs. 15 lakhs and cash amount of Rs. 1.5 lakhs. The father of the informant got awake and therefore the miscreants crushed him by bricks and caused his death.

¶3Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. There is no evidence to connect him to the present crime. He was not seen in the C.C.T.V footage nor any recovery of allegedly looted goods has been made from him like the other co-accused. He has been falsely implicated in this case by the police. The applicant is in jail since 08.10.2022 and has criminal history of 7 cases explained in paragraph 41 of the affidavit in support of the bail application on the basis of which he has been falsely implicated only to workout the case.

¶4Counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail.

¶5Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused; submissions of the learned counsel for the parties noted above; finding force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant; keeping view the uncertainty regarding conclusion of trial; one sided investigation by police, ignoring the case of accused side; applicant being under-trial having fundamental right to speedy trial; larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India; considering the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil vs. C.B.I., passed in S.L.P (Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021; considering 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above their capacity by the under trials and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶6Let the applicant, Anil Kumar, involved in Case Crime No. 05 of 2022, under Section-460 IPC, Police Station-Kotwali, District-Fatehpur, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.

(ii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in Court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

(iii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

(iv) In case the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation then the Trial Court shall initiate proceedings against him in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

(v) The applicant shall remain present in person before the Trial Court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the Trial Court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶7In case, of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶8Identity and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted. Order Date :- 01.11.2023 Rohit High Court of Judicature at Allahabad