Allahabad High Court
Tanveer vs State Of U.P. on 20 July, 2021
Bench: Sanjay Kumar Pachori
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 68
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 14490 of 2021
Applicant :- Tanveer
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Kamaluddin Khan
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.
Heard Shri Shamimul Husain, Advocate holding brief of Shri Kamaluddin Khan, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. and perused the record of the case.
The present bail application has been filed on behalf of applicant, Tanveer with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 255 of 2020, under Section 366, 506, IPC, Police Station- Kotwali Nagar, District- Aligarh, 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 the present case with ulterior motive. As per FIR version, incident took place at 4.00 p.m. on 19.11.2020. The victim is major and she has been recovered on 27/28.11.2020 from Hyderabad. First information report has been lodged after three days of the incident. It is further submitted that ingredient of Section 366, IPC is not made out against the applicant as per the judgment of Apex Court in S. Varadrajan Vs. State of Madras, AIR 1965 SC 942 as the victim herself left her house and went with the applicant. She was not enticed away by the applicant. Charge sheet has already been submitted and the applicant is no more required for the purpose of investigation. The applicant has no criminal history. 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 30.11.2020, 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. In case the applicant is released on bail, he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail.
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 applicant, Tanveer 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.
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.
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 :- 20.7.2021
T. Sinha
