Supreme Court in State through C.B.I v. Amar Mani Tripathi
Case Details
Court No. - 86 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8083 of 2023 Applicant :- Mahnuddin Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ajay Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.
Legal Reasoning
"(i) whether there is any prima facie or reasonable ground to believe that the accused had committed the offence; • • • • • • • (ii) nature and gravity of the charge; (iii) severity of the punishment in the event of conviction; (iv) danger of accused absconding or fleeing if released on bail; (v) character, behaviour, means, position and standing of the accused; (vi) likelihood of the offence being repeated; (vii) reasonable apprehension of the witnesses being tampered with; and (viii) danger, of course, of justice being thwarted by grant of bail." 6. In Rajesh Ranjan Yadav @ Pappu Yadav vs. CBI through its Direction 2007 (1) SCC 70 while recognising that personal liberty is a valuable constitutional right recognized under Article 21, Court observed that while considering question of bail, judicial approach balancing personal liberty as well as interest of the society and also other relevant factors must be observed. Court further held that personal liberty of an accused or convict is also a fundamental right but if the circumstances so justify, it can be eclipsed. The length for which an accused has remained in jail before conviction, i.e., during investigation or trial, is a relevant consideration for the reason that in case ultimately the incumbent is found not guilty, i.e. having not committed any offence, it would be a travesty of justice to keep such a person in jail for years together and denial of personal liberty in such a case though may be mitigated by awarding appropriate compensation but cannot appropriately be compensated at all. Simply because Court takes a long time in trial, it will not be justified to keep a person in jail on the ground that Court or the prosecution is not efficient enough in completing trial in a reasonably short period and the incumbent must remain in jail, even though ultimately he may be found innocent. In fact, if a person is acquitted after a long and delayed trial, though incumbent was throughout in jail, even Judicial Officer would be having a feeling of contrition facing a situation where a person has served sufficiently a long term in imprisonment though, is found innocent and ultimately acquitted. No uniform principle can be laid down since every matter would depend on the circumstances of each case and it cannot be said that a person has remained in jail for long time, for that reason alone bail must be granted, but the period during which an incumbent has been remained in jail, during investigation or trial is a relevant factor. These are certain guidelines laid down in State through C.B.I. v. Amar Mani Tripathi (supra) were reiterated in Rajesh Ranjan Yadav @ Pappu Yadav vs. C.B.I. (supra). 7. In view of above, considering the nature of accusation and severity of punishment in case of conviction, nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tempering of witnesses and other relevant aspects, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I think it appropriate to release applicant on bail. 8. The application is allowed. 9. Let applicant, Mahnuddin, involved in Case Crime No.0244 of 2022, under Sections 457, 380, 411 IPC, Police Station Navabganj, District Farrukhabad be released on bail, if not required in any other case, on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Court concerned with following conditions: (i) The applicant will not temper with the evidence during trial. (ii) The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness. (iii) The applicant will appear before Trial Court on the date fixed. 10. In case of breach of any of above conditions by applicant, the Court below shall be at liberty to cancel his bail. 11. The trial court is directed to expedite the trial of the present case and conclude the same expeditiously preferably within a period of six months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order, if there is no legal impediment. It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case. Order Date :- 13.3.2023 ssm Digitally signed by :- SYED SALMAN MANSOOR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Arguments
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. appearing on behalf of the State, and perused the material brought on record. 2. The present bail application has been moved by the accused- applicant for enlarging him on bail in Case Crime No. 0244 of 2022, under Sections 457, 380, 411 IPC, Police Station Navabganj, District Farrukhabad. 3.It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case due to village party bandi/malicious intention just to harass the applicant. It is next submitted that a concocted and false story has been set up by the prosecution whereas the applicant has not committed any offence as alleged. The Police has arrested the applicant from his house and false alleged recovery has been shown against the applicant. There is no independent, impartial reliable witness of the alleged incident. It is next contended that nothing incriminating article was recovered from the possession of the applicant or on his pointing out. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused has also been touched upon at length. It is further submitted that there is no possibility of applicant either fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses. After the arrest of the applicant on the same day false criminal history has been slapped against the Applicant in which applicant is not named in the First Information Report nor any incriminating article was recovered from the possession of the applicant. The applicant is in jail since 12.01.2023, he undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty, if granted. 4. Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail prayer of the applicant without disputing the aforesaid submissions of the learned counsel for the applicant and submitted that in case applicant is released on bail he will misuse the liberty of bail. 5. Supreme Court in State through C.B.I. Vs. Amar Mani Tripathi 2005 (8) SCC 21 has also observed that normally bail should have been granted unless there exist circumstances/factors justifying denial thereof. Some of such circumstances have been stated as under: •