Allahabad High Court
Mukesh @ Bhola vs State Of U.P. on 14 July, 2021
Bench: Sanjay Kumar Pachori
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 68
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 13122 of 2021
Applicant :- Mukesh @ Bhola
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Dhirendra Kumar Srivastava,Rahul Kumar Tripathi
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.
Heard Sri Rahul Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record of the case.
The present bail application has been filed on behalf of applicant, Mukesh @ Bhola with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 166 of 2020, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 469, 471, 120-B I.P.C., Police Station- Sadar Bazar, District- Mathura, during pendency of trial.
It has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case due to enmity. It is further submitted that the present case has been registered through application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. on 19.09.2020 against five persons including applicant. As per the first information report, it is alleged that daughter of the informant has been kidnapped by Hardev, Bhola, Sukhpal, Bhola and Deshraj on 20.06.2019. In this regard informant has lodged an F.I.R. under Sections 363, 366 I.P.C. and Section 3(2(v) SC/ST Act and Section 3/4 POCSO Act, against the applicant and four other persons, wherein police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. has not been submitted against the applicant Mukesh @ Bhola. He further submits that applicant has no relation with co-accused Hardev and victim (daughter of the informant). There is no material or allegation on record with regard to preparation of forged and fabricated document, i.e., Aadhar Card. He next contended that there is no documentary evidence has been collected by the I.O. during the course of investigation with regard to forged and fabricated Aadhar Card in question. It is further submitted that there is no criminal antecedent to his credit. It is next submitted that there is also no possibility of the applicant either fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses. The applicant, who is languishing in jail since 21.01.2021, undertakes that he 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.
Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant and argued that the allegations levelled in the first information report against the applicant and four other persons, who are prepared forged and fabricated Aadhar Card of the victim. The date of birth of the victim shows as major but the victim was not major on the date of incident. There is clear allegation against the applicant and four other persons for forgery of Aadhar Card, showing the date of birth of the victim as major.
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. Bal Chandra (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 applicant, Mukesh @ Bhola be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions-
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.
The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by the petitioner alongwith 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 :- 14.7.2021
Ishan
