Allahabad High Court
Aftab@ Babloo vs State Of U.P. on 19 December, 2023
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:240556
Court No. - 85
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 45524 of 2023
Applicant :- Aftab@ Babloo
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Ajay Kumar Mishra,Meenu Shukla
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Mayank Kumar Jain,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
This third bail application has been filed on behalf of applicant in Case Crime No. 328 of 2016, under Sections 498-A, 304-B, 201, 120-B I.P.C. and 3/4 D. P. Act, Police Station Sardhana, District Meerut with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail.The first bail application of the applicant was dismissed for want of prosecution by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 08.05.2019. The second bail application of the applicant was dismissed by this Court vide order dated 06.02.2023.
It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. After rejection of second bail application of the applicant, statement of only one witness Hina has been recorded and thereafter none of the witness examined before the trial court. It is further submitted that applicant is languishing in jail since 17.07.2016 for more than seven years having no criminal history and that in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.
Per contra, the learned Additional Government Advocate has opposed the prayer for grant of bail and stated that minimum punishment under Section 304-B I.P.C. is seven years but which may extend to imprisonment for life.
In Union of India Vs. K.A. Najeeb (2021) 3 SCC 713, the Hon'ble Apex Court has observed that:-
"15. This Court has clarified in numerous judgments that the liberty guaranteed by Part III of the Constitution would cover within its protective ambit not only due procedure and fairness but also access to justice and a speedy trial. In Supreme Court Legal Aid Committee v. Union of India SCC para-15 it was held that undertrials cannot indefinitely be detained pending trial. Ideally, no person ought to suffer adverse consequences of his acts unless the same is established before a neutral arbiter. However, owing to the practicalities of real life where to secure an effective trial and to ameliorate the risk to society in case a potential criminal is left at large pending trial, the Courts are tasked with deciding whether an individual ought to be released pending trial or not. Once it is obvious that a timely trial would not be possible and the accused has suffered incarceration for a significant period of time, Courts would ordinarily be obligated to enlarge them on bail."
Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties, nature of evidence and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on 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 Aftab @ Babloo in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned subject to the following conditions:
(1). The applicant will not tamper with the prosecution evidence during the trial.
(2). The applicant will not influence any witness.
(3). The applicant will appear before the trial Court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.
(4). 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 to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move an application before this Court seeking cancellation of the bail.
Order Date :- 19.12.2023/AKT
