High Court · 2025

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on bail during the trial in Case Crime No. 368 of 2020, under Sections 399, 402, 468, 471 IPC, Police Station Sidhauli, District Sitapur. As per the prosecution case, on 25.9.2020 when a police team under the leadership of Karunesh Singh, Inspector was going on night duty, they got information that some scoundrels were going in a Truck and a Car from Lucknow to Sitapur and they would commit robbery on some Trucks etc. The accused- applicant was apprehended in the Truck and from his possession, one country-made pistol of 315 Bore, two live cartridges, Iron Cutters, forged number plates etc. were recovered. It was also said that the accused-applicant informed the police that the registration number mentioned in the registration plate of the Truck was forged and the real number of the Truck is RJ09 GC 1224. In the statement of the accused- applicant, it was also discovered that the accused-applicant and other accused were involved in robbing 50 crates of Cigarettes, subject matter of FIR No.0038 of 2020, under Sections 395, 397 IPC, Police Station Itaunja, District Lucknow. However, the accused-applicant has been granted bail in the aforesaid offence by this Court vide order dated 21.1.2021 in Bail No.9688 of 2020. Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the present applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the instant matter due to ulterior motive. He submits that the applicant is not named in the FIR and his name came into light in the confessional statement of the co-accused, namely, Sajid who has already been enlarged on bail in Bail No. 3440 of 2021 vide order dated 16.7.2021 passed by a Coordinate Bench of this Court. The role of the present applicant is identical to the role of the said co-accused. He further added that there is no material substance/evidence so as to connect the applicant with the offence and no recovery of any incriminating article is ever done from his possession. He also submits that the applicant has four cases criminal history which have been explained in the bail application as well as in the rejoinder affidavit filed today and he is languishing in jail since 23.8.2024. He further submits that the applicant undertakes that in case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of the same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings. Per contra, learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail and has submitted that from the material on record, it is established that accused-applicant and other accused were using the Truck by putting forged number plate for robbery etc. The accused- applicant was apprehended from the Truck and he himself had informed the police that the number plate was forged one. It is correct that except for country-made pistol, live cartridges and some other items like Iron Cutters, no other material connecting the accused-applicant with any other offence was recovered from him. Having heard learned counsels for the parties and after perusal of material placed on record, it transpires that the applicant is languishing in jail since 23.8.2024; the applicant is not named in the FIR and his name came into light in the confessional statement of the co-accused, namely, Sajid who has already been enlarged on bail; the role of the applicant is identical to the role of the said co-accused; there are four cases criminal history of the applicant, which have been explained properly coupled with the fact that he has undertaken that if he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of the same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings. Considering the submissions of learned counsel of both sides, nature of accusation and severity of punishment in case of conviction, nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment and considering larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case of bail. Let the applicant- Supesh @ Sukesh involved in the aforementioned 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:- (1) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, or otherwise during the investigation or trial; (2) 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. He 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 of the Indian Penal Code; (3) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C.; and (4) 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. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code. The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by the court concerned and in case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison. It is clarified that the observations 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 merits of the case. Order Date :- 20.2.2025 Shravan SHRAVAN KUMAR SHRAVAN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Lucknow Bench

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on bail during the trial in Case Crime No. 368 of 2020, under Sections 399, 402, 468, 471 IPC, Police Station Sidhauli, District Sitapur. As per the prosecution case, on 25.9.2020 when a police team under the leadership of Karunesh Singh, Inspector was going on night duty, they got information that some scoundrels were going in a Truck and a Car from Lucknow to Sitapur and they would commit robbery on some Trucks etc. The accused- applicant was apprehended in the Truck and from his possession, one country-made pistol of 315 Bore, two live cartridges, Iron Cutters, forged number plates etc. were recovered. It was also said that the accused-applicant informed the police that the registration number mentioned in the registration plate of the Truck was forged and the real number of the Truck is RJ09 GC 1224. In the statement of the accused- applicant, it was also discovered that the accused-applicant and other accused were involved in robbing 50 crates of Cigarettes, subject matter of FIR No.0038 of 2020, under Sections 395, 397 IPC, Police Station Itaunja, District Lucknow. However, the accused-applicant has been granted bail in the aforesaid offence by this Court vide order dated 21.1.2021 in Bail No.9688 of 2020. Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the present applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the instant matter due to ulterior motive. He submits that the applicant is not named in the FIR and his name came into light in the confessional statement of the co-accused, namely, Sajid who has already been enlarged on bail in Bail No. 3440 of 2021 vide order dated 16.7.2021 passed by a Coordinate Bench of this Court. The role of the present applicant is identical to the role of the said co-accused. He further added that there is no material substance/evidence so as to connect the applicant with the offence and no recovery of any incriminating article is ever done from his possession. He also submits that the applicant has four cases criminal history which have been explained in the bail application as well as in the rejoinder affidavit filed today and he is languishing in jail since 23.8.2024. He further submits that the applicant undertakes that in case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of the same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings. Per contra, learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail and has submitted that from the material on record, it is established that accused-applicant and other accused were using the Truck by putting forged number plate for robbery etc. The accused- applicant was apprehended from the Truck and he himself had informed the police that the number plate was forged one. It is correct that except for country-made pistol, live cartridges and some other items like Iron Cutters, no other material connecting the accused-applicant with any other offence was recovered from him. Having heard learned counsels for the parties and after perusal of material placed on record, it transpires that the applicant is languishing in jail since 23.8.2024; the applicant is not named in the FIR and his name came into light in the confessional statement of the co-accused, namely, Sajid who has already been enlarged on bail; the role of the applicant is identical to the role of the said co-accused; there are four cases criminal history of the applicant, which have been explained properly coupled with the fact that he has undertaken that if he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of the same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings. Considering the submissions of learned counsel of both sides, nature of accusation and severity of punishment in case of conviction, nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment and considering larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case of bail. Let the applicant- Supesh @ Sukesh involved in the aforementioned 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:- (1) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, or otherwise during the investigation or trial; (2) 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. He 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 of the Indian Penal Code; (3) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C.; and (4) 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. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code. The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by the court concerned and in case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison. It is clarified that the observations 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 merits of the case. Order Date :- 20.2.2025 Shravan SHRAVAN KUMAR SHRAVAN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Lucknow Bench