High Court

and Shri Brijesh Pratap Singh, learned AGA for the State- respondent.

3. The instant third application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.63 of 2022, under Sections 394, 411, 120-B I.P.C., Police Station Kapoorpur, District Hapur, during pendency of the trial in the court below.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that this is the third bail application filed on behalf of the applicant and his earlier two bail applications have already been dismissed after considering the merit of the case but he is pressing the instant third bail application mainly on the ground that applicant is in jail in the present matter since 20.10.2022 i.e. for last more than two and half years and till date out of total nine witnesses of the charge-sheet, only four witnesses could be examined by the trial court.

5. He further submits that as far as merit of the present case is concerned, however, as per allegation, Rs.9,00,000/- were looted and out of Rs.9,00,000/-, Rs.1,22,150/- were recovered from the possession of the applicant but there is no evidence that applicant also participated in the alleged robbery and however, he is facing trial under Sections 394, 411, 120-B I.P.C. but at the worst, he can only be convicted for offence under Section 411 I.P.C.

6. He further submits that from the record, it reflects, co-accused Vikas @ Buddhu was arrested at spot and from his possession Rs.2,50,000/- were recovered and he disclosed the name of the applicant and therefore, name of the applicant was surfaced in the present matter through the statement of the co-accused.

7. He further submits that however, apart from the present case, applicant is having criminal history of five other cases but his criminal history has been explained in the instant third bail application and in all the cases, he is on bail.

8. He further submits that therefore, considering the above facts and circumstances of the case, applicant should be enlarged on bail.

9. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submits that this is the third bail application and from the possession of the applicant very substantial part of the looted money was recovered but could not dispute the fact that applicant is in jail in the present matter since 20.10.2022 i.e. for last more than two and half years and till date out of total nine witnesses of the charge-sheet, only four witnesses could be examined by the trial court.

10. He further could not dispute the fact that there is no evidence on record, which can suggest that applicant also participated in the alleged crime of robbery alongwith other accused.

11. He further could not dispute the fact that name of the applicant was surfaced in the present matter through the statement of co- accused, who was arrested at spot.

12. He however, further submits that apart from the present case, applicant is having criminal history of five other cases but could not dispute the fact that in all the cases, he is on bail.

13. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.

14. However, this is the third bail application filed on behalf of the applicant and his earlier two bail applications have already been dismissed but it reflects, he is in jail in the present matter since

20.10.2022 i.e. for last more than two and half years and till date out of total nine witnesses of the charge-sheet, only four witnesses could be examined by the trial court.

15. Further, form the record, it reflects, name of the applicant was surfaced through the statement of co-accused, who was arrested at spot and however, thereafter Rs.1,22,150/- was recovered from the possession of the applicant, which was allegedly part of total robbed amount of Rs.9,00,000/- but there is no evidence on record that applicant also participated in the alleged crime of robbery.

16. Further, however, apart from the present case, applicant is having criminal history of five other cases but his criminal history has been explained in the instant third bail application and in all the cases, he is on bail.

17. Further, law is settled, if otherwise case of bail is made out then ordinarily bail application of an accused should not be withheld on the basis of his criminal history.

18. Further, law is also settled, unless proven guilty an accused is deemed to be innocent and his bail application should be dismissed for punitive purpose.

19. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

20. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed.

21. Let the applicant- Saleem Alias Sanny be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted. (ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity.

22. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant.

23. It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial. Order Date :- 15.7.2025 Zafar

and Shri Brijesh Pratap Singh, learned AGA for the State- respondent.

3. The instant third application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.63 of 2022, under Sections 394, 411, 120-B I.P.C., Police Station Kapoorpur, District Hapur, during pendency of the trial in the court below.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that this is the third bail application filed on behalf of the applicant and his earlier two bail applications have already been dismissed after considering the merit of the case but he is pressing the instant third bail application mainly on the ground that applicant is in jail in the present matter since 20.10.2022 i.e. for last more than two and half years and till date out of total nine witnesses of the charge-sheet, only four witnesses could be examined by the trial court.

5. He further submits that as far as merit of the present case is concerned, however, as per allegation, Rs.9,00,000/- were looted and out of Rs.9,00,000/-, Rs.1,22,150/- were recovered from the possession of the applicant but there is no evidence that applicant also participated in the alleged robbery and however, he is facing trial under Sections 394, 411, 120-B I.P.C. but at the worst, he can only be convicted for offence under Section 411 I.P.C.

6. He further submits that from the record, it reflects, co-accused Vikas @ Buddhu was arrested at spot and from his possession Rs.2,50,000/- were recovered and he disclosed the name of the applicant and therefore, name of the applicant was surfaced in the present matter through the statement of the co-accused.

7. He further submits that however, apart from the present case, applicant is having criminal history of five other cases but his criminal history has been explained in the instant third bail application and in all the cases, he is on bail.

8. He further submits that therefore, considering the above facts and circumstances of the case, applicant should be enlarged on bail.

9. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submits that this is the third bail application and from the possession of the applicant very substantial part of the looted money was recovered but could not dispute the fact that applicant is in jail in the present matter since 20.10.2022 i.e. for last more than two and half years and till date out of total nine witnesses of the charge-sheet, only four witnesses could be examined by the trial court.

10. He further could not dispute the fact that there is no evidence on record, which can suggest that applicant also participated in the alleged crime of robbery alongwith other accused.

11. He further could not dispute the fact that name of the applicant was surfaced in the present matter through the statement of co- accused, who was arrested at spot.

12. He however, further submits that apart from the present case, applicant is having criminal history of five other cases but could not dispute the fact that in all the cases, he is on bail.

13. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.

14. However, this is the third bail application filed on behalf of the applicant and his earlier two bail applications have already been dismissed but it reflects, he is in jail in the present matter since

20.10.2022 i.e. for last more than two and half years and till date out of total nine witnesses of the charge-sheet, only four witnesses could be examined by the trial court.

15. Further, form the record, it reflects, name of the applicant was surfaced through the statement of co-accused, who was arrested at spot and however, thereafter Rs.1,22,150/- was recovered from the possession of the applicant, which was allegedly part of total robbed amount of Rs.9,00,000/- but there is no evidence on record that applicant also participated in the alleged crime of robbery.

16. Further, however, apart from the present case, applicant is having criminal history of five other cases but his criminal history has been explained in the instant third bail application and in all the cases, he is on bail.

17. Further, law is settled, if otherwise case of bail is made out then ordinarily bail application of an accused should not be withheld on the basis of his criminal history.

18. Further, law is also settled, unless proven guilty an accused is deemed to be innocent and his bail application should be dismissed for punitive purpose.

19. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

20. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed.

21. Let the applicant- Saleem Alias Sanny be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted. (ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity.

22. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant.

23. It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial. Order Date :- 15.7.2025 Zafar