Court No. - 89
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 195 of 2021 Applicant :- Mukesh Singh Rathore Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Gauri Shanker Mishra,Rahul Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.
Heard Mr. Rahul Mishra, learned counsel for applicant and learned A.G.A. for State.
Perused the record.
This application for bail has been filed by applicant Mukesh Singh Rathore seeking enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 501 of 2020, under sections 414, 420 IPC, P.S. Sardhana, District Meerut during the pendency of trial.
Record shows that in respect of an incident which occurred on 27.10.2020, S.I. Daulatram lodged an F.I.R. dated 27.10.2020, which was registered as Case Crime No. 501 of 2020, under sections 414, 420 IPC, P.S. Sardhana, District Meerut. In the aforesaid F.I.R., one person namely, Mukesh Singh Rathore (applicant herein) has been nominated as solitary named accused.
As per the prosecution story as unfolded in F.I.R., it is alleged that during routine checking of vehicles, a vehicle bearing Registration No. HR 99 T-1590 was stpped. Upon examination of aforesaid vehicle, some narcotic substance was recovered from the same. It was further found that chassis number and engine number of aforesaid vehilce have been interfered with.
Learned counsel for applicant contends that applicant is innocent, he has been falsely implicated in aforesaid case crime number on account of Police rivalry. Applicant is in custody since 27.10.2020. Learned counsel for applicant then submits that applicant has already enlarged on bail in Case Crime No. 502 of 2020, under sections 18/20 N.D.P.S Act, P.S. Sardhana, District Meerut, vide order dated 6.1.2021, passed by this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 210 of 2021. It is next contended that disputed vehicle was registered in the name of wife of applicant. There is no independent witness of recovery. As such recovery is doubtful.Various other submissions have been made in respect of alleged recovery of contraband. There is no possibility of applicant fleeing away from the judicial process or tempering with the witnesses. In case, applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail. On the aforesaid factual premise, it is thus urged that applicant is liable to be enlarged on bail.
Learned A.G.A opposed the prayer for bail.
Having heard learned counsel for applicant, learned A.G.A. for the state and upon perusal of material brought on record, nature of offence, evidence, complicity of the accused and larger mandate of Article 21 of the Constitution of India and dictum of Apex Court in Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 but without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I am of the view that applicant has made out a case for bail. Accordingly, bail application is allowed.
Let the applicant Mukesh Singh Rathore, involved in aforesaid case crime number, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice :-
1. The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.
2. The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.
3. The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.
Order Date :- 6.1.2021 Arshad