Allahabad High Court
Ajay @ Suresh Harijan 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. - 11584 of 2021
Applicant :- Ajay @ Suresh Harijan
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Majahar Ali
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.
Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant, which is taken on record.
Heard Sri Majahar Ali, 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, Ajay @ Suresh Harijan with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 32 of 2020, under Sections 411, 413, 414, 419, 420, 467, 468 I.P.C., Police Station- Gopiganj, District- Bhadohi, 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 ulterior motive. The first information report was lodged by the police against the applicant and 9 other persons; the alleged recovery has been made without complying the mandatory provisions of Section 100 Cr.P.C. He next contended that the name of the applicant has came into light on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused Rehan and nothing incriminating article has been recovered from the possession of the applicant. Criminal history of 5 cases against the applicant has been duly explained in para 3 of the supplementary affidavit.
It is further submitted that co-accuseds, Ramchandra Maurya @ Neta, Ashu Miya, Raju @ Javed Ali, Rehan @ Munna, Ankit Sharma and Akil @ Murga having similar role, have already been enlarged on bail by the Coordinate Bench of this Court vide orders dated 19.01.2020, 11.01.2021, 05.01.201, 05.08.2020, 22.06.2020 and 05.08.2020, in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos.3328 of 2021, 1084 of 2021, 47152 of 2020, 15284 of 2020, 15158 of 2020 & 15584 of 2020 respectively. He next contended that the case of the accused is not on worse footing than that of the co-accuseds who have already been released on bail, and therefore, on principles of parity also the accused should be released on bail. It is further submitted that there is no other 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 06.02.2020, 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.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail and has not pointed out any other criminal case except the aforesaid criminal case.
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, Ajay @ Suresh Harijan 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.
4. In case the applicant has been enlarged on short term bail as per the order of committee constituted under the orders of Hon'ble Supreme Court his/her bail shall be effective after the period of short-term bail comes to an end.
5. The applicant shall be enlarged on bail on execution of personal bond without sureties till normal functioning of the courts is restored. The accused will furnish sureties to the satisfaction of the court below within a month after normal functioning of the courts are restored.
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 :- 20.7.2021
Ishan
