Court No. - 89
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 47253 of 2021 Applicant :- Aarif Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Anoop Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Vikas Budhwar,J.
Heard Sri Gaurav Kumar Singh (A.O.R. No.A/G 0072) holding brief of Sri Anoop Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, and Sri K.K. Rajbhar, the learned AGA for the State.
This bail application purported to be under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. has been moved on behalf of the applicant- Aarif for enlarging him on bail in Case Crime No.96 of 2021, under Sections 41, 411, 413, 419, 420, 467, 468 IPC, registered at Police Station-Hanumanganj, District-Kushinagar.
The bail application so preferred by the applicant has been rejected by the court below on 5.10.2021.
Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that a first information report has been lodged by Sub-Inspector Pankaj Kumar Gupta against the applicant and 2 others, namely Sonu Yadav and Saddam, at P.S. Hanumanganj, District Kushinagar on 31.7.2021 being FIR No. 96 of 2021, under Sections 41, 411, 413, 419, 420, 467, 468 IPC, with an allegation that on the tip so received by the police, they conducted a raid, pursuant whereto they recovered two two-wheelers being one Bullet and one A-I Smart Motorcycle from the applicant. Learned counsel for the applicant has further argued that there was no occasion for him to commit such offence. The entire story is an implanted story. The applicant at no point of time has committed the said offence. Learned counsel for the applicant has further argued that the recovery memo is a manufactured document. He has further contended that applicant is languishing in jail since 31.7.2021 and further one of the co- accused being Sonu Yadav has been enlarged on bail in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 45848 of 2021 on 21.12.2021 and thus the applicant is entitled to parity in that regard. Learned counsel for the applicant has also drawn attention of this Court towards paragraph-14 of the affidavit in support of the bail application, so as to contend that the 2 cases which have been sought to be shown against the applicant being Case No. 294 of 2021, under Section 379 IPC, P.S. Hata, District Kushinagar and Case Crime No. 513 of 2021, under Section 379 IPC and 179(1) of Motor Vehicles Act are nothing but the off-shoot of the present case, pursuant whereto, the applicant has been confined in jail. He finally contended that if the accused is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.
Countering the above submission learned AGA for the State has though vehemently opposed the bail, but could not question the arguments so raised by the learned counsel for the applicant in particular to the criminal history of the applicant.
Looking into the nature of the offence, there are no chances of accused fleeing from justice and period of detention in jail, without expressing any opinion on the merits, this case is found to be a fit case for 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 applications on behalf of accused persons.
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- Aarif 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) 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.
Order Date :- 22.12.2021 N.S.Rathour