Allahabad High Court
Rajnish vs State Of U.P. on 13 February, 2023
Bench: Krishan Pahal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 83
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6279 of 2023
Applicant :- Rajnish
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Pardeep Kumar,Ram Bahadur,Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Amar Nath
Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.
1. List has been revised.
2. Heard Shri Anil Kumar Srivastava, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Shri Ram Bahadur, counsel for the applicant and Shri P.N. Tiwari, Advocate holding brief of Shri Amar Nath, learned counsel for the informant as well as Shri Rajesh Kumar Srivastava, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.303 of 2022, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 307, 452, 504, 506/34 I.P.C. and Section 7 of Criminal Law Amendment Act, Police Station Sarsawa, District Saharanpur, during the pendency of trial.
4. As per prosecution story, the co-accused person Varun @ Fauji had an altercation with the deceased person Monu while traveling on the road on 09.08.2022 at about 3:00 pm. Enraged by the said incident, the applicant and other six named co-accused persons are stated to have come to the house of the deceased person and are stated to have fired indiscriminately on Monu and his father Sethpal injuring them by firearm weapons. In the said incident, Monu is stated to have been put to death at about 5:00 pm.
5. Learned Senior Counsel for the applicant has argued that the case of the applicant is at a different footing to the co-accused persons, namely, Varun @ Fauji, Babu @ Tirathlal and Sumit. Learned Senior Counsel has further stated that the co-accused person Mukul has already been enlarged on bail by this Court passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.59490 of 2022 vide order dated 03.02.2023. Learned Senior Counsel has placed much reliance on the statement of the injured person Sethpal whereby it has been stated that the three co-accused persons, namely, Varun @ Fauji, Babu @ Tirathlal and Sumit, were carrying firearm weapons. Learned Senior Counsel has further stated that the applicant and the co-accused person Mukul and others have not been assigned any firearm weapons. Learned Senior Counsel has further placed much reliance on the autopsy report of the deceased person whereby it has been opined by the doctor conducting the autopsy that the cause of death is ante-mortem firearm injury. The applicant is languishing in jail since 19.08.2022, having no criminal history. He further submitted that since the role of the applicant is identical to that of co-accused, who has already been enlarged on bail, he is also entitled to be enlarged on bail on the ground of parity.
6. The prayer for bail has been vehemently opposed by learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the informant. However, the aforesaid factual aspects of parity to the co-accused and of no criminal history of the applicant, have not been disputed by them.
7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, and also taking into consideration the judgment of the Apex Court passed in the case of Paras Ram Vishnoi vs. The Director, Central Bureau of Investigation, MANU/SCOR/22410/2021 and the judgment of this Court passed in the case of Nanha S/o Nabhan Kha vs. State of U.P., 1993 Cri.L.J. 938, 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 on the ground of parity. The bail application is allowed on the ground of parity.
8. Let the applicant- Rajnish involved in aforementioned case crime number be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions.
(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.
(ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.
(iii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.
(iv) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.
(v) 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 or tamper with the evidence.
9. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.
10. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.
11. It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion on the testimony of the witnesses.
Order Date :- 13.2.2023
Ravi Kant
