Heard Sri Dhirendra Babu Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri I. S. Yadav, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
Learned counsel for the applicant has prayed that he may be permitted to add Section 336 in the prayer clause. He is permitted to incorporate the same during the course of the day.
This Bail Application (under Section 439 Cr.P.C.) has been moved for seeking bail in Case Crime No. 355 of 2020, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 504, 506, 333, 332, 353, 336, 307, 395, 412 of I.P.C. & Section 7 of Criminal Law Amendment Act and 25 (1 A V) of Ayudh Adhinium, P.S. Saini, District Kaushambi, during pendency of trial.
As per F.I.R., which has been lodged by the police, it is stated that the applicant along with other co-accused named in the F.I.R. are stated to have assaulted the police by bricks, stones and danda and one accused Sinku had snatched the pistol of the informant and also made fire by that but the same did not hit anyone. It is further mentioned that the accused applicant is harden criminal.
It has been argued on behalf of the learned counsel for the accused applicant that accused applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. No recovery of any incriminating article has been made from him. It is further argued that the co-accused Indrakali and Samra @ Sambhar have already been granted bail by co-ordinate bench of this Court vide order dated 19.11.2020 and 14.12.2020 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 39368 of 2020 & 39827 of 2020. The accused applicant has criminal history of six cases which have been explained in para no. 16 of the affidavit and in all theses cases he is on bail but the copy of bail orders have not been annexed by the him. The accused applicant is in jail since 15.08.2020; if the accused is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail but has not controverted the aforesaid facts.
Looking to the fact that no concrete evidence is available against the accused applicant and case of the accused applicant is on same footing as that of the co-accused who have been granted bail, quantum of the punishment, nature of the offence and period of detention in jail, without expressing any opinion on the merits, this case is found to be a fit case for bail.
Let the applicant Pintoo @ Pinku 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 :-
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.
Taking into consideration that Covid-19 is continuing and due to which certified copy would not be possible to be obtained by the applicant, therefore, if a copy of this order downloaded from the official website of Allahabad High Court and self attested by the counsel for the applicant is placed before the Court, the same would be entertained.
Since, copy of bail orders have not been annexed by the learned counsel for the applicant, therefore, if it is found that he is not on bail in any case, his bail would stand cancelled.
Order Date :- 7.1.2021 VPS