Court No. - 89
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 47429 of 2021 Applicant :- Ajay Jatav Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Vijay Singh Rathore Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Vikas Budhwar,J.
Heard Sri Vijay Singh Rathore, learned counsel for the applicant, and Sri K.K. Rajbhar, 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 being Ajay Jatav for seeking bail in Case Crime No. 0107 of 2021, under Section 394, 411 IPC registered at Police Station- Sirsakalar, District- Jalaun.
The bail application of the applicant has been rejected by the court below on 13.10.2021.
The learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the FIR has been lodged by complainant being Rakesh Kumar against two unknown person at P.S. Sirsakalar, District Jalaun being FIR No. 0107 on 23.08.2021 alleging that the commissioning of the offence on 18.08.2021 with relation to the fact that the complainant being a labor was coming to the house after completing his daily work however, the unknown persons intercepted him and robbed a mobile phone and Rs. 500/- cash and also administered beating him pursuant thereto simple injuries were sustained by him. He further argued that the applicant is a labor and there was no occasion for him to have committed the said offence. The learned counsel for the applicant has invited the attention of the Court towards the fact that the FIR is first of all against unknown persons however, the same has been filed after delay of five days as the commission of the offence is shown on 18.08.2021 and the FIR has been lodged on 23.08.2021. He further argued that the aforesaid recovery is also implanted one and nothing has been recovered from the applicant. In paragraph no. 22 of the affidavit in support of the bail application in order to explain criminal history so as to contend that there is one criminal case pending against the applicant which is case crime no. 109/2021 u/s 4/25 Arms Act. However the Court finds that in paragraph no. 22 the applicant has mentioned section 4/25 of the IPC and on a pointed query from the learned A.G.A. he replied that a solitary case is against the applicant u/s 4/25 Arms Act. The learned counsel for the applicant has next argued that the applicant is in jail since 24.08.2021. He lastly submits that if the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.
Countering the said submission, learned AGA for the State has opposed the bail and argued that this is not a fit case for bail wherein the applicant should be enlarged on bail. However, the learned A.G.A. has not disputed the facts and legal submission of the learned counsel for 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 Ajay Jatav 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). In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
(vi). Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.
It is made clear that 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 Nisha