Allahabad High Court
Naheen And 2 Others vs State Of U.P. on 2 August, 2021
Bench: Sanjay Kumar Pachori
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 68
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 21183 of 2021
Applicant :- Naheen And 2 Others
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Vinod Kumar Yadav
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.
Heard Sri Vinod Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record of the case.
The present bail application has been filed on behalf of applicants,Naheem, Sharif and Saeem with a prayer to release them on bail in Case Crime No. 31 of 2021, under Section 3(1) of U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities ( Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station- Chhibramau, District- Kannauj, during pendency of trial.
It has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the instant case due to ulterior motive. It is further submitted that the applicants have been implicated in the instant case on the basis of solitary case being case crime no. 0682 of 2020 under Section 3/5/8 of U.P. Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act. The applicants were never involved in any criminal activities. There is no other criminal history of the applicants. The applicants are neither gang leaders nor run any gang. He next contended that the co-accused Abdul Kayum has been enlarged on bail by a Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 29.07.2021 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.26493 of 2021. It is next submitted that there is also no possibility of the applicants either fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses. The applicants, who are languishing in jail since 3.10.2020 undertake that they will not misuse the liberty, if granted. It has also been pointed out that in the wake of heavy pendency of cases in the Court, there is no likelihood of any early conclusion of trial.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the fact that there is no other criminal history of the applicants except shown in gang chart.
It is settled position of law that bail is the rule and committal to jail is an exception in the case of State of Rajasthan Vs. Balchand @ Baliay (1977) 4 SCC 308, the Apex Court observed that refusal of bail is a restriction on the personal liberty of the individual guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution and opined para 2 "The basic rule may perhaps be tersely put as bail, not jail, except where there are circumstances suggestive of fleeing from justice or thwarting the course of justice or creating other troubles in the shape of repeating offences or intimidating witnesses and the like, by the petitioner who seeks enlargement on bail from the court. We do. not intend to be exhaustive but only illustrative." and considering the facts of the case and keeping in mind, the ratio of the Apex Court's judgment in the case of Gudikanti Narasimhulu And Ors vs Public Prosecutor, High Court Of Andhra Pradesh, AIR 1978 SC 429, larger mandate of Article 21 of the constitution of India, the nature of accusations, the nature of evidence in support thereof, the severity of punishment which conviction will entail, the character of the accused-applicant, circumstances which are peculiar to the accused, reasonable possibility of securing the presence of the accused at the trial, reasonable apprehension of the witnesses being tampered with, the larger interest of the public/ State and other circumstances, but without expressing any opinion on the merits, I am of the view that it is a fit case for grant of bail.
Let applicants, Naheem, Sharif and Saeem be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on their furnishing a personal bond each and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions-
1. The applicants shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.
2. The applicants shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.
3. The applicants shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.
It is clarified that anything said in this order is limited to the purpose of determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. The trial court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led unaffected by anything said in this order.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by the petitioner along-with a self attested identity proof of the said person (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number to which the said Aadhar Card is linked.
The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.
Order Date :- 2.8.2021
Gss
