High Court
Case Details
Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:164320 Court No. - 76 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 31171 of 2023 Applicant :- Prempal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rakesh Pathak Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Rishi Yadav,Suresh Singh Hon'ble Vikram D. Chauhan,J. 1. Learned A.G.A. submits that instructions have been received and has no objection in case the bail application is heard on merits.
Legal Reasoning
2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Suresh Singh, learned counsel for the informant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 3. It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the first information report was lodged on 6.8.2022 in respect of an incident taken place on 20.6.2022. The first information report was lodged with the allegation that the three nominated accused persons in the first information report have fired on the husband of the informant, as a result of the same, the husband of the informant has sustained one firearm injury. No specific role has been assigned in the first information report and the injured was medically examined and the injury report is at page 43 of the affidavit where one firearm injury has been shown on the right shoulder. The applicant had given loan to the injured. However, the same was not returned and when the applicant demanded the same, the first information report has been lodged. 3A. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the statement of the injured was recorded on 14.1.2023 i.e. after more than six months of the alleged incident and there is no explanation as to why the statement of the injured and informant was recorded after such a delay. There is improvement in the statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. qua the first information report as the specific role of firing has been assigned after six months to the applicant without giving any reason for delay. The applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. The applicant has no criminal history. Applicant is languishing in jail since 5.6.2023 and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial. 4. Sri Suresh Singh, learned counsel for the informant submits that the injured has sustained firearm injury. In the statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. the role of firing is not assigned to the applicant. However, he does not dispute the fact that in the first information report general allegation of firing has been made on three accused persons. Thereafter, in the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. specific role has been assigned. 4A. On a pointed query being made to the learned counsel for the informant as to why the statement of the injured and the informant was recorded after six months, learned counsel for the informant could not specify any reason in respect of the same. 5. Learned A.G.A. for the State opposed the prayer for bail but does not dispute factual matrix of the case. 5A. Learned AGA has not brought any fact or circumstances to indicate criminal history or antecedents of the applicant which would disentitle the applicant for Bail. 6. It is not the case of the State that the applicant has not cooperated in the investigation or proceedings before the trial court. 7. The principle that Bail is a rule and Jail is an exception has been well recognised by Apex Court more specifically on the touch stone of Article 21 of the Constitution. The said principle has been reiterated by the Apex Court in Satyendra Kumar Antil Vs Central Bureau of Investigation and another, 2022 (10) SCC 51. Learned AGA has not shown any exceptional circumstances which would warrant denial of bail to the Applicant. 8. No material, facts or circumstances has been shown by learned AGA that the accused may tamper with the evidence or witnesses or the accused is of such character that his mere presence at large would intimidate the witnesses or that accused will use his liberty to subvert justice or tamper with the evidence. 9. It is settled principle of law that the object of bail is to secure the attendance of the accused at the trial. No material particulars or circumstances suggestive of the applicant fleeing from justice or thwarting the course of justice or creating other troubles in the shape of repeating offences or intimidating witnesses and the like have been shown by learned AGA for the State. 10. Learned AGA for the State has not shown any material or circumstances that the accused/applicant is not entitled to bail in larger interests of the public or State. 10A. In the present case, it is to be seen that the first information report was lodged after a delay of two months by an order passed on the application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. Subsequently, in the first information report the allegation of firing has been recorded against three nominated accused persons including the applicant. After six months on 14.1.2023 the statement of the injured and informant has been recorded by the Investigating Officer. As per the learned counsel for the informant, the injured was discharged from the hospital on 26.6.2022. However, why the statement of the injured and informant was recorded after six months has not been explained satisfactorily. There is a improvement in the allegations made in the first information report, statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. The tutoring of the witness cannot be ruled out on account of delay when there is no explanation to the delay. 11. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, submissions of learned counsel for the parties 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. 12. Let the applicant Prempal involved in Case Crime No.328 of 2022, under Sections 307, 504, 506 I.P..C., Police Station Jahanabad, District Pilibhit be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions:- 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 will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted and/or the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required. iv. The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected. v. 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. vi. The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court. vii. In the event, the applicant changes his residential address, the applicant shall inform the court concerned about new residential address in writing. 13. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court. Order Date :- 16.8.2023 Bhaskar Digitally signed by :- BHASKAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad