Court No. - 89
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 53668 of 2021 Applicant :- Mohammad Sabir @ Mohammad Shamim Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Ankit Agarval,Dilip Kumar Patel Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Vikas Budhwar,J.
Heard Sri Ankit Agarval, learned counsel for the applicant, and Sri L. D. 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 Mohammad Sabir @ Mohammad Shamim for seeking bail in Case Crime No. 234 of 2021, under Section 395, 412 and 120B I.P.C., P.S. Narora, District Bulandshahr.
The bail application preferred by the applicant bearing no. 5208 of 2021, has been rejected by the Additional Sessions Judge, Bulandshahr on 23.11.2021.
The learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the FIR was lodged by the complainant being Ravendra Singh against four unknown persons on 26.08.2021at police station Narora, District Bulandshahr being FIR No. 0234 u/s 394 IPC alleging that on 26.08.2021 at about 06:15 A.M. an unknown woman knocked the door of the house of the complainant saying that she was having stomach ache and she wanted to answer the nature's call and when the mother of the complainant resisted the same and asked about the whereabouts of the said woman then she was made a call and thereafter three persons came who forcefully entered into the house and administered beating and took away jewellery, two mobile phones and Rs. 50,000/- cash. According to the learned counsel for the applicant it appears that recovery of the aforesaid amount so made from the co- accused Nazma and nothing has been recovered from the possession of the applicant. The learned counsel for the applicant has also relied upon the order dated 01.12.2021 passed by coordinate Bench of this Court in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 47975 of 2021 (Rajkeen Vs. State of U.P.) wherein one of the co-accused being Rajkeen has been granted bail in respect of the aforesaid case crime number above noted sections, therefore, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail. The learned counsel for the applicant has next argued that the applicant is in jail since 27.08.2021 and the paragraph no.
16 of the application shows that the applicant has no previous criminal history. 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 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 fact that the applicant does not possess any criminal history.
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 Mohammad Sabir @ Mohammad Shamim 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 :- 20.12.2021 Nisha