Allahabad High Court
Atul Kumar Vishwakarma @ Bullet @ ... vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. ... on 8 August, 2023
Bench: Saurabh Lavania
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC-LKO:52554
Court No. - 18
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 270 of 2023
Applicant :- Atul Kumar Vishwakarma @ Bullet @ Loha Mantri
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.
Counsel for Applicant :- Mrs.Suniti Sachan
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Pt.Mohit Sharma
Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State of U.P. as also Sri Pt.Mohit Sharma, learned counsel for the informant and perused the record.
Present bail application has been filed by the applicant seeking bail in Case Crime No.316 of 2019, under Section-302 I.P.C., Police Station-Bhadokhar, District-Rae Bareli.
This is the second bail application. First bail application i.e. BAIL No. - 11577 of 2019 was rejected by this Court vide order dated 30.07.2021.
It would be appropriate to refer here that at the time of rejecting the first bail application BAIL No. - 11577 of 2019, before the Trial Court statements of four prosecution witnesses were recorded and out of these, two witnesses were Investigating Officer(s) and the Doctors, who conducted post-mortem.
It is admitted fact that till date seven witnesses have been examined and total witnesses, as per charge sheet, are 21 witnesses which have to be examined. Thus, remaining witnesses to be examined are 14. In this background of the case, present bail application has been filed.
While pressing this bail application, learned counsel for the applicant submitted that there is specific provision i.e. Section 309 of Cr.P.C., according to which, trial Court should try to record the statement of witnesses of prosecution on day-to-day basis and in the instant case, this Court also directed the Trial Court to conclude the Trial with expedition vide order dated 30.07.2021 by which the first bail application preferred by the applicant was dismissed and more than two years have elapsed w.e.f. the date of order i.e. 30.07.2021, but the Trial Court has not concluded the trial.
In continuation, it is stated that the applicant is in jail since 13.07.2019 and almost four and a half years have elapsed even though the trial has not been concluded till date. This period of incarceration is one of the grounds to release the applicant on bail particularly in view of the fact that entire case against the applicant is based upon the circumstantial evidence and there is no eye witness to support the story of prosecution and the main witnesses of fact have already been examined and if the applicant is released on bail by this Court then it would not be possible for the applicant to influence the witnesses of the prosecution. In these circumstances, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
In regard to the ground related to period of incarceration, learned counsel for the applicant placed reliance on the judgment(s) passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case(s) of Union of India vs. K.A.Najeeb, decided on 01.02.2021; State of Kerala vs. Raneef; decided on 03.01.2011; Smt.Akhtari Bi vs. State of M.P., decided on 22.03.2001 and Paras Ram Vishnoi vs. The Director Central Bureau of Investigation, decided on 27.07.2021. Reference has also been made to the judgment passed by this Court in the case of Anokhi Lal Second Bail vs. State of U.P.; reported in 2022 SCC OnLine All 185.
It is also submitted that there is no apprehension that after being released on bail, the applicant may flee from the course of law or may otherwise misuse the liberty of bail.
Learned A.G.A.-Sri Hansraj Verma as also Sri Pt.Mohit Sharma, learned counsel for the informant opposed the prayer for grant of bail, however, they could not dispute the above contention made by the learned counsel for the accused-applicant including the fact that conclusion of trial in near future is extremely bleak.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, perusing the record and also considering the nature of allegations, arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and keeping in mind judgment(s), referred above as also the period of incarceration i.e. about four and a half years as also that the applicant is not in a position to influence the witness of the prosecution as also that the applicant has no criminal history, as indicated in para 30 of the affidavit filed in support of instant application seeking bail and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a fit case for granting bail.
Let applicant-Atul Kumar Vishwakarma @ Bullet @ Loha Mantri be released on bail in aforesaid Case Crime, on his furnishing personal bond to the satisfaction of the court concerned forthwith. Applicant is also directed to furnish two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:-
(1) Applicant will not try to influence the witnesses or tamper with the evidence of the case or otherwise misuse the liberty of bail.
(2) Applicant will fully cooperate in expeditious disposal of the case and shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when witnesses are present in the Court.
(3) Applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed.
(4) The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.
(5) The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.
Any violation of above conditions will be treated misuse of bail and learned Court below will be at liberty to pass appropriate order in the matter regarding cancellation of bail.
Order Date :- 8.8.2023
Vinay/-
