Allahabad High Court
Tapan Dutt Mishra vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. ... on 21 March, 2023
Bench: Dinesh Kumar Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 17
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3929 of 2023
Applicant :- Tapan Dutt Mishra
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko.
Counsel for Applicant :- Dev Mani Mishra,Rashmi Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ashwini Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
2. This is 4th bail application. Against the rejection of the 3rd bail application vide order dated 11.03.2022 passed in Bail No.1034 of 2022, the accused-applicant had approached the Supreme Court by filing S.L.P. (Criminal) Diary No.30692 of 2022. However, the Supreme Court has rejected the said S.L.P. vide order dated 14.10.2022 as under:-
"Delay condoned.
We are not inclined to interfere with the impugned judgment and hence, the special leave petition is dismissed.
However, the petitioner would be entitled to file a fresh application for bail after a reasonable time or in case of change in circumstances. In case any such application is filed, the same would be considered in accordance with law.
Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of."
3. This is 4th bail application filed by the accused-applicant seeking bail in FIR No.26 of 2020 initially registered under Section 394 IPC, Police Station Kamrauli, Amethi against three unknown persons. Later on, offence under Section 394 IPC has been converted under Sections 395, 412, 120B, 34 IPC.
4. It is alleged that the complainant had an ice factory at Utelwa, Jagdishpur, Amethi. He had Rs.5,49,000/- cash on the date of the incident in his factory and his wife was wearing a gold necklace, earrings and other gold ornaments. On 17.02.2020 at around 10:00 P.M., three unknown persons entered the factory having firearm in their hands. These persons held the complainant, his family and staff hostages and robbed the cash and the jewellery. After the miscreants fled away from the place of occurrence, the complainant called the police by dialing 112.
5. During investigation name of the accused-applicant has come to light and the offence after investigation has been converted under Sections 395, 412, 120B, 34 IPC. Allegedly, from the possession of the accused-applicant, Rs.6500/- has been recovered which was looted by them from the complainant.
6. The accused-applicant is a dreaded criminal. His long criminal history of heinous offences has been taken note of by learned trial court while rejecting the bail application. Rich horoscope of the heinous offences allegedly committed by the accused-applicant would read as under:-
"(i) Case Crime No.26 of 2020 under Sections 395, 412, 120B, 34 IPC, Police Station Kamrauli, Amethi;
(ii) Case Crime No.122 of 2020 under Sections 399, 02, 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC, Peeperpur, Amethi;
(iii) Case Crime No.123 of 2020, under Section 3/25 Arms Act, Police Station Peeperpur, Amethi;
(iv) Case Crime No.165 of 2019, under Sections 3/25 Arms Act, Police Station Peeperpur, Amethi;
(v) Case Crime No.32 of 2009, under Section 307 IPC, 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act, Police Station Badla, District Jaunpur;
(vi) Case Crime No.339 of 2012 under Section 10 CrPC, Police Station Kotwali Nagar, Pratapgarh;
(vii) Case Crime No.67 of 2012 under Section 323, 34, 506 IPC, Police Station Kotwali Nagar, Pratapgarh;
(viii) Case Crime No.103 of 2013 under Sections 302 IPC, Police Station Mauaima, Pratapgarh;
(ix) Case Crime No.32 of 2013, under Section 307 IPC, Police Station Badla, Jaunpur;
(x) Case Crime No.104 of 2013, under Section 3/25 Arms Act, Police Station Badla, Jaunpur;
(xi) Case Crime No.253 of 2013, under Section 2/3(1) U.P. Gangsters Act, Police Station Badla, Jaunpur;
(xii) Case Crime No.255 of 2015, under Section 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 504, 506, 427 IPC, Police Station Kotwali Nagar, Pratapgarh;
(xiii) Case Crime No.512 of 2015 under Sections 147, 148, 144, 307, 308, 302, 504, 506, 120B, 452 IPC, 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act, Police Station Kotwali Nagar, Pratapgarh;
(xiv) Case Crime No.1027 of 2015 under Sections 120B, 302 IPC, Police Station Kotwali Nagar, Pratapgarh;
(xv) Case Crime No.1119 of 2015 under Section 3/24 Arms Act, Police Station Kotwali Nagar, Pratapgarh;
(xvi) Case Crime No.712 of 2015, under Sections 41, 411, 413 IPC, Police Station Kotwali Nagar, Pratapgarh;
(xvii) Case Crime No.474 of 2015, under Sections 394, 302, 307 IPC, 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act, Police Station Kotwali Nagar, Pratapgarh;
(xviii) Case Crime No.467 of 2015, under Sections 302, 307, 120B IPC, Police Station Lalganj, Pratapgarh;and
(xix) Case Crime No.361 of 2015, under Sections 307, 364, 394, 411 IPC, Police Station Lalganj, District Pratapgarh."
7. Criminal history of the accused-applicant would disclose that he had been involved in four murder cases besides several cases under Sections 307, 364, 392, 394, 395 etc. Such a dreaded criminal is threat to the life and liberty of the law abiding citizens of this country. He is a threat to the complainant as well as witnesses. This Court in several cases has been of the opinion that since criminals are not entitled to be set free at liberty of bail as they after release on bail, commit another offence, and because of fear and terror, the witnesses do not turn up or they turn hostile. These accused get acquittal by winning/threatening/eliminating the witnesses.
8. There is no change circumstance inasmuch as even the Supreme Court has rejected the bail application of the accused-applicant. The accused-applicant has very long criminal history of heinous offences. I do not find any ground to enlarge the accused-applicant on bail at this stage. This bail application is rejected.
Order Date :- 21.3.2023
prateek
