Heard Sri Amarnath Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicants, Ms. Pooja, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the first informant/complainant, Sri Sanjay Singh, learned AGA- I, for the State and perused the material brought on record.
It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. It is a cross case wherein both side has received injuries. There is general allegation against all the accused persons. The applicant has not committed the alleged offence. There is no independent witness of the alleged incident. It is next contended that the ingredients of offences are absent and entire prosecution story is based on false and frivolous allegations. It is further contended that no specific role has been assigned to the applicant. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused has also been touched upon at length. It is further submitted that there is no possibility of applicant either fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses. Applicant is in jail since 11.11.2020 and undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty, if granted.
Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail prayer of the applicants without disputing the aforesaid submissions of the learned counsel for the applicants and submitted that in case applicants are released on bail they will misuse the liberty of bail.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment, and larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh v. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 2 SCC 22 and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a case of bail.
Let applicants- Lallan @ Lallu Yadav and Kallu Yadav, be released on bail in Case Crime No. 479 of 2020, under Sections - 147, 323, 452, 308 IPC, Police Station- Cholapur, District- Varanasi, on their furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties each (one should be of a family member), to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:-
1. The applicants will attend and co-operate the trial proceedings pending before the court concerned on the date fixed after release.
2. They will not tamper with the witnesses.
3. They will not indulge in any illegal activities during the bail period.
The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicants to prison.
It is clarified that the observations, if any, 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 ultimate merits of the case.
The concerned court below is directed to conclude the trial expeditiously, preferably within a period of six months from the date of production of a copy of this order.
The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad. The concerned Court 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 :- 18.2.2021 ssm