Allahabad High Court
Manoj Tiwari vs State Of U.P. on 30 October, 2012
Bench: Jayashree Tiwari
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 25
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 26200 of 2012
Petitioner :- Manoj Tiwari
Respondent :- State Of U.P.
Petitioner Counsel :- Rakesh Dubey,Rajiv Gupta
Respondent Counsel :- Govt.Advocate,A K Awasthi,Manish Tiwari,Pratik J. Nagar,Supriya Pratik Nagar
Hon'ble Mrs. Jayashree Tiwari,J.
Case called out in the revised list.
Heard the learned counsel for the accused applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate and Shri Manish Tiwari, learned counsel for the respondent.
The present bail application has been filed for enlarging the accused applicant on bail in Case Crime No.1796 of 2011 under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 302, 323, 504, 506, 447, 448 IPC and 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act, Police Station Kalyanpur, District Kanpur Nagar.
Learned counsel for the accused applicant has filed a computerized copy of the order of co-accused Kallu Bajpai, Mahendra Tiwari and Sunil Tiwari who have been enlarged on bail by this Court vide orders dated 9.7.2012 and 1.8.2012 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 14944 and 14945 of 2012. The same be taken on record and be made part of the record.
It is contended on behalf of the accused applicant that co-accused Kallu Bajpai, Mahendra Tiwari and Sunil Tiwari standing on the same footing have already been enlarged on bail by this Court. The case of the present accused applicant is too at par with the case of the co-accused. Learned counsel for the respondent opposed the bail application on the ground that there is variation in the parity because the accused applicant was arrested on the spot whereas the other co-accused persons have escaped. However, learned counsel for the respondent conceded this fact. So far as the role and participation of the accused persons in the commission of the offence is concerned. their role is similar. The recovery which is made from the possession of the accused applicant is not covered under section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act which may be relevant at the time of arrest that he was arrested along with weapon as alleged.
Learned A.G.A. pointed out that there are four criminal cases pending against the accused applicant out of which two cases relate to section 25 of the Arms Act and the other two to offence under section 323 IPC. Learned A.G.A. further informed that in none of the cases any conviction has been recorded by any competent criminal court.
After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record it is is apparently clear that the role assigned to the present accused applicant in the entire episode of the murder are at par. The arrest on the spot cannot be treated to be a factor which may distinguish the role as assigned and admitted and as such the denial of bail to the accused applicant will amount to violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India which provides that every person shall be equal before law and shall have equal treatment before law. Considering this parameter and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case at this stage and also considering the ground of parity, I think it expedient that the accused applicant may also be released on bail.
Let the accused applicant Manoj Tiwari who is involved in the aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. one lac and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions:
Order Date :- 30.10.2012
SC
