Court No. - 68
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 31235 of 2021 Applicant :- Aniket Singh @ Chikku Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Pramod Pathak Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.
Heard Sri Pramod Pathak, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused material on record.
The present bail application has been filed on behalf of applicant Aniket Singh @ Chikku under Section 439 of The Code of Criminal Procedure, with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 150 of 2021 under Sections 147,148, 149, 307, 504, 506 of the Indian Penal Code, registered at Police Station Sindhaura, District Varanasi, during pendency of the trial.
As per allegations made in the First Information Report dated 21.06.2021 that on 21.06.2021 at 3.15 p.m., the informant went to Sindhaura, Varanasi for getting his passbook printed along with his friend Vimal Vikash Rai. while they were eating Choumeen at shop of Rajesh Rajbhar, the applicant along with five other persons reached there by Scorpio bearing no. U.P.65 AU 8282 and started indiscriminate firing, as a result of which, Sandeep Mishra and Vimal Vikas Rai received firearm injuries on their head.
It has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. Six persons including the applicant have been named in the First Information Report. As per statement of injured, namely, Sandeep Kumar Mishra and Vimal Vikash Rai, the main role of causing injury by firearm has been assigned to co- accused Pradeep Misrha @ Brajesh Mishra. It is also submitted that no specified role for causing injuries has been assigned to the applicant. The F.I.R. of the alleged incident has been lodged on the basis of false and frivolous allegations. Charge-sheet has been submitted on 23.06.2021, as such, the applicant is no more required for the purposes of investigation. Co-accused Gaurav Mishra @ Moni having identical role has already been granted bail by this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application 34769 of 2021 vide order dated 20.09.2021, there applicant is also entitled to be released onb bail. The applicant has no previous criminal history to his credit. In case, he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. The applicant is languishing in Jail since 23.06.2021.
It is settled position of law that bail is the rule and committal to jail is an exception in the case of State of Rajasthan Vs. Balchand @ Baliay (1977) 4 SCC 308, the Apex Court observed that refusal of bail is a restriction on the personal liberty of the individual guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution and opined para 2 "The basic rule may perhaps be tersely put as bail, not jail, except where there are circumstances suggestive of fleeing from justice or thwarting the course of justice or creating other troubles in the shape of repeating offences or intimidating witnesses and the like, by the petitioner who seeks enlargement on bail from the court. We do not intend to be exhaustive but only illustrative" and considering the facts of the present case and keeping in mind, the ratio of the Apex Court's judgment in the case of Gudikanti Narasimhulu And Ors vs Public Prosecutor, High Court Of Andhra Pradesh, AIR 1978 SC 429, larger mandate of Article 21 of the constitution of India, the nature of accusations, the nature of evidence in support thereof, the severity of punishment which conviction will entail, the character of the accused-applicant, circumstances which are peculiar to the accused, reasonable possibility of securing the presence of the accused at the trial, reasonable apprehension of the witnesses being tampered with, the larger interest of the public/State and other circumstances, but without expressing any opinion on the merits, I am of the view that it is a fit case for grant of bail. Hence, the present bail application is allowed.
Let applicant, Aniket Singh @ Chikku be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions-
(i) 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 or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
(ii) The applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses.
(iii) 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 of Cr.P.C.
(iv) 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 the trial court.
(v) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
It is clarified that anything said in this order is limited to the purpose of determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. The trial court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led unaffected by anything said in this order.
The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by the applicant along-with a self attested identity proof of the said person (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number to which the said Aadhar Card is linked.
The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.
Order Date :- 21.9.2021 aks