Court No. - 89
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 46968 of 2021 Applicant :- Sunil Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Mithilesh Kumar Shukla,Avanish Kumar Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Vikas Budhwar,J.
Heard Sri Mithilesh Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant, and Sri D. N. Tiwari, 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 Sunil Kumar for seeking bail in Case Crime No. 215 of 2020, under Section 3 (1) U.P. Gangster Act, 1986 registered at Police Station- Nawabganj, District- Kanpur Nagar.
The bail application of the applicant has been rejected by the court below on 18.10.2021.
The learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the FIR was got registered by S.H.O Ramkant Pachauri against six named accused persons including the applicant u/s 3 (1) U.P. Gangster Act, 1986 being FIR No. 0215 on 02.07.2020 in relation to the lodging of the case crime no. 250/2019 u/s 8/20 N.D.P.S. Act. He further argued that while referring to the gang chart which already on record as annexure 2 of the application so as to contend that in case crime no. 250/2019 the applicant has enlarged on bail by coordinate Bench of this Court in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 28626/20210 (Sunil Kumar vs. State of U.P.) on 21.09.2020 and so far as the other case crime no. 149/2020, u/s 8/20 N.D.P.S. Act, in which the applicant has also enlarged on bail by the court below on 23.02.2021. He next argued that the applicant is in jail since 10.05.2020. 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 opposed the bail and 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 facts and the legal submissions as argued by the learned counsel for 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 Sunil Kumar 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 :- 21.12.2021 Nisha