Court No. - 89
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 46317 of 2021 Applicant :- Deepak Kumar Vishwakarma Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Ratan Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Vikas Budhwar,J.
Heard Shri Ratan Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant, and Shri B.N. Tiwari, learned A.G.A. for the State.
This bail application purported to be under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. has been moved on behalf of applicant-Deepak Kumar Vishwakarma for enlarging him on bail in connection with Case Crime No. 26 of 2021, under Section 3(1) U.P. Gangster Act and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 registered at Police Station Kotwali City, District Mirzapur.
The Bail Application No. 1249 of 20212, so preferred by the applicant, has been rejected by the court below, on 21.10.2021.
Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the FIR has been lodged against the applicant and one Santosh Yadav, son of Shri Babu Lal Yadav under Section 3(1) U.P. Gangster Act and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act before Police Station Kotwali City, District Mirzapur on 18.02.2021 being FIR No. 0026 of 2021. Learned counsel for the applicant has referred the gang chart which is at page no. 18 of the paper book so as to contend that there are two criminal cases shown to be pending against the applicant. While referring to the Case Crime No. 03/2021 under Sections 379, 411, 419, 420 I.P.C., the applicant has been enlarged on bail by virtue of the order dated 03.09.2021 passed in Bail Application No. 785 of 2021 by the Court of Additional Session Judge/Court No. 3, Mirzapur. A copy whereof is at page no. 23 of the paper book. So far as the Case Crime No. 07/2021 under Section 41/411 I.P.C. is concerned, the applicant has preferred a bail application being Application No. 787 of 2021 which came to be allowed on 03.09.2021. A copy whereof is at page no. 21 of the paper book. Learned counsel for the applicant has next argued that once the applicant has been enlarged on bail in the aforesaid two cases as mentioned in the gang chart, the same cannot put to motion against the applicant while lodging the FIR and initiating criminal proceedings against the applicant. Learned counsel for the applicant has next argued that the applicant is in jail since 19.02.2021. He lastly submits that if the accused is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.
Countering the said submission, learned A.G.A., has vehemently argued that this is not a fit case, wherein bail should be granted in favour of the applicant. However, learned A.G.A. could not dispute the factum of the pendency of the criminal cases as well as allowing the bail applications in favour 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-Deepak Kumar Vishwakarma 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 :- 21.12.2021 Saurabh