High Court · 2025

The learned counsel for the applicant stated that in some of the cases the applicant spent more than the period of sentence in custody and, therefore, those cases have been disposed of. In rest of the cases, the applicant has been granted bail. However, he could not point out as to how a case can be disposed of merely because the applicant has spent more than a period of sentence in custody.

6. In response to a specific query put by the court as to whether the applicant has been acquitted or convicted in those cases, the learned counsel for the applicant has stated he has not gone through the paper book as he has some problem in his eyes and he made a request for adjournment of the case after commencement of the submissions.

7. As the question of personal liberty of applicant is involved and the court was not satisfied by the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant, it perused the record. It then transpired that in Criminal Case No.198/CHI, under Section 380 I.P.C. the applicant has been convicted on the basis of his confession vide order dated 25.02.2020, passed by the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Yamuna Nagar at Jagadhri and he was sentenced to the period already undergone in custody. In Criminal Case No.264 of 2019, under Sections 380, 457 I.P.C. the applicant has been convicted on the basis of his confession vide order dated

03.03.2020, passed by the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Yamuna Nagar at Jagadhri and he was sentenced to custody for the period already undergone and Rs.500/- fine. The applicant was acquitted in Criminal Case No.91 of 2019, under Sections 457, 380 I.P.C. by the judgment and order dated 28.02.2020, passed by Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Yamuna Nagar at Jagadhri. In Criminal Case No.172 of 2019, under Sections 450, 380 I.P.C. the applicant has confessed the offence even without any prosecution evidence having been led and he was convicted by means of an order dated

11.06.2019, passed by the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Yamuna Nagar at Jagadhri, while he was in custody since 09.01.2019. In Criminal Case No.397 of 2019 the applicant was convicted on the basis of his confessional statement vide order dated 12.12.2019, passed by the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Yamuna Nagar at Jagadhri while the case was fixed for prosecution evidence and no evidence had been led. In Criminal Case No.94 of 2019 also the applicant was convicted in a similar manner by means of an order dated 11.06.2019 and so was done in Criminal Case No.2711 of 2023, under Section 174-A I.P.C. by means of an order dated

14.04.2024, passed by Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Bilaspur. The applicant was similarly convicted on the basis of his confession in Criminal Case No.9 of 2019, under Section 380 I.P.C. by means of an order dated 02.03.2020, passed by the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Yamuna Nagar at Jagadhri. The applicant was acquitted of all the charges in Criminal Case No.62 of 2018, undere Section 25- 54-59 Arms Act by means of a judgment and order dated

27.01.2020, passed by Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Yamuna Nagar at Jagadhri. It appears that the trial was concluded in only two cases, in both of which the applicant was acquitted, whereas in seven cases the applicant has been convicted on the basis of his confession. The orders of sentence record that the applicant is a poor person.

8. From the aforesaid facts, it appears that the applicant has confessed his guilt in seven cases apparently because he is unable to contest the criminal case due to his poverty.

9. None of the orders makes a mention of defense counsel having been provided to the applicant by the Legal Aid Cell. In numerous other matters also, this Court has observed that accused persons who are languishing in custody make confessions of their guilt to get rid of the pending proceedings and the Courts convict them and sentence them to the period already undergone in custody. The aforesaid facts depict a pathetic state of affairs where poor persons in custody confess their guilt because their interests in litigation are not being looked after properly either by the Legal Aid Cell or by the trial courts. Effective measures must be taken to remedy this situation by ensuring effective implementation of the legal aid scheme.

10. In the present case before this court also, the learned counsel for the applicant has come totally unprepared and has not rendered any assistance to the court, perhaps for the reason that the fee to his satisfaction could not be paid on behalf of the applicant.

11. Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the fact that the applicant is languishing in jail since 23.07.2024 although he has been granted bail in all the four cases mentioned in the gang chart; that in both the cases in which a trial was held the applicant has been acquitted and he has been convicted in seven cases on the basis of confession, although no prosecution evidence was led in any of those cases and without making any observation, which may affect the merits of the case, I am of the view that the aforesaid facts are sufficient for making out a case for enlargement of the applicant on bail in the aforesaid crime.

12. Accordingly, this bail application stands allowed.

13. Let the applicant-Jabbar be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and one surety to the satisfaction of magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:- (i) the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; (ii) the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses; (iii) the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court, unless his appearance is exempted by the learned trial court.

14. Let a copy of this order be sent to the Principal Secretary Law for his information, so that appropriate steps are taken to ensure proper legal aid to the needy persons and they are not compelled to make confessions in criminal cases merely because they are not able to defend themselves due to lack of resources. . Order Date :- 27.2.2025 Ram. [Subhash Vidyarthi, J.] RAM SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

The learned counsel for the applicant stated that in some of the cases the applicant spent more than the period of sentence in custody and, therefore, those cases have been disposed of. In rest of the cases, the applicant has been granted bail. However, he could not point out as to how a case can be disposed of merely because the applicant has spent more than a period of sentence in custody.

6. In response to a specific query put by the court as to whether the applicant has been acquitted or convicted in those cases, the learned counsel for the applicant has stated he has not gone through the paper book as he has some problem in his eyes and he made a request for adjournment of the case after commencement of the submissions.

7. As the question of personal liberty of applicant is involved and the court was not satisfied by the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant, it perused the record. It then transpired that in Criminal Case No.198/CHI, under Section 380 I.P.C. the applicant has been convicted on the basis of his confession vide order dated 25.02.2020, passed by the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Yamuna Nagar at Jagadhri and he was sentenced to the period already undergone in custody. In Criminal Case No.264 of 2019, under Sections 380, 457 I.P.C. the applicant has been convicted on the basis of his confession vide order dated

03.03.2020, passed by the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Yamuna Nagar at Jagadhri and he was sentenced to custody for the period already undergone and Rs.500/- fine. The applicant was acquitted in Criminal Case No.91 of 2019, under Sections 457, 380 I.P.C. by the judgment and order dated 28.02.2020, passed by Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Yamuna Nagar at Jagadhri. In Criminal Case No.172 of 2019, under Sections 450, 380 I.P.C. the applicant has confessed the offence even without any prosecution evidence having been led and he was convicted by means of an order dated

11.06.2019, passed by the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Yamuna Nagar at Jagadhri, while he was in custody since 09.01.2019. In Criminal Case No.397 of 2019 the applicant was convicted on the basis of his confessional statement vide order dated 12.12.2019, passed by the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Yamuna Nagar at Jagadhri while the case was fixed for prosecution evidence and no evidence had been led. In Criminal Case No.94 of 2019 also the applicant was convicted in a similar manner by means of an order dated 11.06.2019 and so was done in Criminal Case No.2711 of 2023, under Section 174-A I.P.C. by means of an order dated

14.04.2024, passed by Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Bilaspur. The applicant was similarly convicted on the basis of his confession in Criminal Case No.9 of 2019, under Section 380 I.P.C. by means of an order dated 02.03.2020, passed by the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Yamuna Nagar at Jagadhri. The applicant was acquitted of all the charges in Criminal Case No.62 of 2018, undere Section 25- 54-59 Arms Act by means of a judgment and order dated

27.01.2020, passed by Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Yamuna Nagar at Jagadhri. It appears that the trial was concluded in only two cases, in both of which the applicant was acquitted, whereas in seven cases the applicant has been convicted on the basis of his confession. The orders of sentence record that the applicant is a poor person.

8. From the aforesaid facts, it appears that the applicant has confessed his guilt in seven cases apparently because he is unable to contest the criminal case due to his poverty.

9. None of the orders makes a mention of defense counsel having been provided to the applicant by the Legal Aid Cell. In numerous other matters also, this Court has observed that accused persons who are languishing in custody make confessions of their guilt to get rid of the pending proceedings and the Courts convict them and sentence them to the period already undergone in custody. The aforesaid facts depict a pathetic state of affairs where poor persons in custody confess their guilt because their interests in litigation are not being looked after properly either by the Legal Aid Cell or by the trial courts. Effective measures must be taken to remedy this situation by ensuring effective implementation of the legal aid scheme.

10. In the present case before this court also, the learned counsel for the applicant has come totally unprepared and has not rendered any assistance to the court, perhaps for the reason that the fee to his satisfaction could not be paid on behalf of the applicant.

11. Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the fact that the applicant is languishing in jail since 23.07.2024 although he has been granted bail in all the four cases mentioned in the gang chart; that in both the cases in which a trial was held the applicant has been acquitted and he has been convicted in seven cases on the basis of confession, although no prosecution evidence was led in any of those cases and without making any observation, which may affect the merits of the case, I am of the view that the aforesaid facts are sufficient for making out a case for enlargement of the applicant on bail in the aforesaid crime.

12. Accordingly, this bail application stands allowed.

13. Let the applicant-Jabbar be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and one surety to the satisfaction of magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:- (i) the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; (ii) the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses; (iii) the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court, unless his appearance is exempted by the learned trial court.

14. Let a copy of this order be sent to the Principal Secretary Law for his information, so that appropriate steps are taken to ensure proper legal aid to the needy persons and they are not compelled to make confessions in criminal cases merely because they are not able to defend themselves due to lack of resources. . Order Date :- 27.2.2025 Ram. [Subhash Vidyarthi, J.] RAM SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad