Allahabad High Court
Jeetu Alias Jitendra vs State Of U.P. on 21 October, 2022
Bench: Siddharth
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 69
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 20198 of 2022
Applicant :- Jeetu Alias Jitendra
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Pradeep Kumar Mishra
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Hemant Kumar Singh,Sandeep Kumar
Hon'ble Siddharth,J.
Heard Shri Vinay Saran learned Senior Advocate assisted by Shri Pradeep Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant; Shri Sandeep Kumar, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A.
The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Jeetu Alias Jitendra, with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 121 of 2021, under Sections 147,148,149,307,323,506,302 IPC Police Station Baldeo, District- Mathura, during pendency of trial.
In the First Information Report three accused persons, namely, Karan Pal alias Gulu, Anil including the applicant were assigned the role of firing on the deceased. In the statement of the deceased he has not assigned any specific role of causing fatal injury to him. He has assigned general role to all the accused.Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that applicant was not assigned specific role of firing in the statement of the deceased recorded by the investigating officer.Subsequently recovery of one country made pistol was made from the pointing out of the applicant..The other accused, who have been assigned the role of firing have been granted bail by this court. The implication of the applicant is on the basis of subsequent statements of witnesses collected by the investigating officer. The applicant is in jail since 11.7.2021.He has criminal history of one case, which has been explained in paragraph-2 of the supplementary affidavit.
Learned counsel for the informant has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant and has submitted that three witnesses have implicated the applicant and co-accused have been granted bail on the ground that applicant is the main accused.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant but could not dispute the aforesaid facts.
This court finds that applicant was not before the court, which have granted bail to the co-accused by assigning main role to the applicant. Article 14 of the Constitution of India there is equality before law or equal protection of the law to all. No order can be passed by the court against an accused without hearing him at the stage of bail or trial.The main role assigned to the applicant by the court while granting bail to the co-accused is not relevant for deciding the application of the applicant on merits.
Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, considering the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 and recent judgment dated 11.07.2022 of the Apex Court in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil vs. C.B.I., passed in S.L.P (Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021 and considering 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above their capacity by the under trials and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.
Let the applicant be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.
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. That the applicant shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;
5. The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence and the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law to ensure presence of the applicant.
6. The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court default of this condition is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
Order Date :- 21.10.2022
Atul kr. sri.
