Faisal v. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and perused the record.

It is alleged in the prosecution case that the applicant who was the driver of vehicle No.UP21BN3566, on 26.2.2025 while transporting a consignment containing 1,399.65 bags of fortune basmati rice worth Rs.25,88,964/- from Lucknow to Karnal went missing and the said truck did not reach its destination at Karnal.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant was driving the car along side the truck. The driver of the truck Bilal Hussain, who was carrying the stolen rice has been granted bail by this court vide order dated 10.7.2025 passed in Bail No.6363 of 2025. The applicant was driving the car who was accompanying the truck. Thus, case of the applicant is on better footing. He claims parity. The applicant has no previous criminal history. The applicant is in jail since 14.3.2025. It is further submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away after being released on bail or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail.

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the fact that the applicant has no criminal history, the co-accused has been granted bail, arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties, the period for which the applicant is in jail and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail.

Let the applicant Faisal, involved in Case Crime No.65 of 2025 under sections 316(2), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 317(2), 3(5) BNS, P.S. Bijnaur, district Lucknow, 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 with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:- (i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial. (ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness. (iii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any 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 to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (iv) 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. (v) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A I.P.C. (now 269 BNS) (vi) 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. (now 84 BNSS) 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 I.P.C. (now 209 BNS).