Allahabad High Court
Bhola Singh And Another vs State Of U.P. on 22 March, 2023
Bench: Siddharth
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 85
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12764 of 2023
Applicant :- Bhola Singh And Another
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Raj Kumar Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Kaushal Kishor
Hon'ble Siddharth,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants; Shri Kaushal Kishore, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A.
The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicants, Bhola Singh and Ramilan with a prayer to release them on bail in Case Crime No. 60 of 2022, under Sections 419,420,467,468,471,120-B IPC Police Station Bharakoop, District- Chitrakoot, during pendency of trial.
There is allegation against the applicants that they are witness of the fraudulent 'Will' executed in favour of the Beer Singh.Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that applicants are alleged to be marginal witnesses of the Will and only beneficiary of the Will was Beer Singh, who has already been enlarged on bail by this court vide order dated 19.10.2022 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 43109 of 2022. The applicants are not beneficiary from Will deed executed in favour of Beer Singh.The applicants are marginal witness of the Will deed and due to this reason they have been falsely implicated in this case. The applicants are in jail since 22.12.2022 and have no criminal history.
Learned counsel for the informant has opposed the bail of the applicant and submitted that valuable land was willed by the co-accused, Shiv Karan, who has not been enlarged on bail.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant but could not dispute the aforesaid facts.
After considering the rival contentions, this court finds that applicants are marginal witnesses of the Will.The marginal witnesses are not registered to be conversant with the genuineness of the document executed. They only testify to due execution of document before them.
Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused; submissions of the learned counsel for the parties noted above; finding force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant; keeping view the uncertainty regarding conclusion of trial; one sided investigation by police, ignoring the case of accused side; applicant being under-trial having fundamental right to speedy trial; larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India; considering the dictum of Apex Court in the 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; 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 applicants be released on bail on their 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 applicants shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.
2. The applicants shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.
3. The applicants shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.
4. That the applicants 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 applicants 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 applicants 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 :- 22.3.2023
Atul kr. sri.
