High Court
Case Details
Court No. - 79 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 55433 of 2021 Applicant :- Chhotey Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rajesh Kumar Mishra,Ajay Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vikas Budhwar,J.
Legal Reasoning
Be that as it may be, considering the submissions on the question of bail, prima facie, this Court finds that this is a fit case for bail as the applicant has explained the criminal history. Further, the applicant is languishing in jail since 23.06.2021 and looking into the nature of the acquisition, the evidence collected by the I.O. in support of the charge, gravity of offence, nature and severity of the punishment in the case of conviction, complicity of accused and all attending circumstances, this is a fit case for grant of bail. Courts have taken notice of the overcrowding of jails during the current pandemic situation (Ref.: Suo Motu Writ Petition (c) No. 1/2020, Contagion of COVID 19 Virus in prisons before the Supreme Court of India). These circumstances shall also be factored in while considering bail application on behalf of accused person. In the light of the aforenoted discussion and without making any observations on the merits of the case, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant Chhotey, son of Ali Jan, involved in aforesaid crime 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 that :- i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial. (ii) The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment. (iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail. (iv) 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 to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (v) The applicant shall appear before the concerned police station on Monday of each calender month. (vi) Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. Any observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned Trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses. Taking into consideration that Covid-19 is continuing and due to which certified copy would not be possible to be obtained by the applicant, therefore, if a copy of this order downloaded from the official website of Allahabad High Court and self attested by the counsel for the applicant is placed before the Court, the same would be entertained. Order Date :- 5.3.2022 Sazia Digitally signed by SAZIA AQUIL Date: 2022.03.08 13:54:15 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Arguments
Heard Mr. Ram Raksha Tiwari, holding brief of Mr. Rajesh Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Shravan Kumar Ojha, learned Additional Government Advocate representing the State. This bail application purported to be under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been moved on behalf of applicant- Chhotey, son of Ali Jan, for enlarging him on bail in connection with Case Crime No. 193 of 2021, under section 3/5/8 of U.P. Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act, section 3/11 of Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, Act read with sections 269 and 270 IPC and section 3 of Epidemic Act, police station Bilaspur, district Rampur. The bail application, so preferred by the applicant for enlarging him on bail, has been rejected by the court below on 29.10.2021. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the the applicant has been falsely implicated in the case in question. Learned for the applicant further argued that it is no injury case. The recovery is being sought to be shown is a planted one. There is no independent witness of the alleged recovery. Learned counsel for the applicant has drawn the attention of the Court towards paragraph No. 6 of the bail application so as to contend that so far as Case Crime Nos. 116 of 2021, 120 of 2021, 196 of 2021, 201 of 2021, 213 of 2021 and 90 of 2021 are concerned, they are all intermingled and post lodging of the present F.I.R. and once the applicant was falsely implicated in the present case, these cases are being sought to be lodged. Learned counsel for the applicant has further contended that so far as Case Crime No. 296 of 2021 that purports to be under section 3(1) of U.P. Gangsters & Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, is post lodging of the present F.I.R. and so far as Case Crime No.251 of 2021 is concerned, the same is also post lodging of the present F.I.R. being under sections 307, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 411 IPC, and so far as Case Crime No. 254 of 2021, under section 4/25 of Arms Act and so far as Case Crime No.241 of 2021 is concerned, the same is under section 3(1) of U.P. Gangsters & Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act post lodging of the F.I.R. Learned counsel for the applicant has further argued the this Court in Case Crime No. 251 of 2021 had occasioned to consider the case history of the applicant and thereafter, enlarged the applicant on bail in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 4321 of 2022 vide order dated 14.02.2022. For ready reference, the order dated 14.02.2022 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 4321 of 2022 is quoted herein-below: "Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Vikas Sahai, learned A.G.A. for the State. It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. As per prosecution case, the applicant along with five other co-accused persons are said to have fired upon the police party and has caused injury to the police constable. It is submitted that in the said incident no one received any injury. No injury report has been produced by learned AGA to substantiate the allegation in the F.I.R. It is further contended that false recovery of knife has been shown from the applicant. There is no independent witness to the alleged recovery. It is next contended that the applicant does not have any criminal history prior to the present case. After his arrest the police authorities have repeatedly nominated in other cases. It is next submitted that in case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty. The applicant is in jail since 23.06.2021. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts. Perused the first information report as well as the averments made in the bail application. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also perusing the material on record, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, let the applicant Chhotey involved in Case Crime No.251 of 2021, under Sections 307, 420, 467, 468, 471, 411 I.P.C., P.S. Shahabad, District Rampur be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned on the following conditions that: 1. the applicant shall not temper with the prosecution evidence. 2. the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witness; 3. the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court. In case of default of any of the conditions enumerated above, the order granting bail shall automatically be vacated. " Learned counsel for the applicant has further argued that the applicant is unnecessarily languishing in jail since 23.06.2021. If the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail, he be enlarged on bail. Countering the said submission, learned Additional Government Advocate has opposed the prayer for bail while arguing that the applicant is repeating the same offences time on and on and thus, some conditions to be imposed and according to him, in case the applicant is directed to appear on every Monday of each month before the concerned police station, then the same will suffice. Mr. Ram Raksha Tiwari, holding brief of Mr. Rajesh Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant has made a statement at bar that he has received instructions from his client and according to him, his client is agreeable and he undertakes to present himself on Monday of each month before the concerned police station.