Allahabad High Court
Rahul @ Jitendra Kumar And Another vs State Of U.P. on 1 April, 2024
Author: Sanjay Kumar Pachori
Bench: Sanjay Kumar Pachori
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:55709
Court No. - 70
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12217 of 2024
Applicant :- Rahul @ Jitendra Kumar And Another
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Ajay Pratap Singh,Vijay Tripathi
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.
Heard Shri Vijay Tripathi, learned counsel for applicant, ShriAlok Sharma, learned A.G.A. for State and perused the material on record.
The present bail application has been filed on behalf of applicants- Rahul @ Jitendra Kumar and Saurabh @ Saurabh Nauhwar under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, with a prayer to enlarge them on bail in Case Crime No. 435 of 2023, under Sections 395, 412 I.P.C., Police Station- Malpura, District- Agra during pendency of the trial, after rejection the bail application of the applicants by Additional District and Sessions Judge, Court No. 12, Agra vide order dated 14.03.2024.
Learned counsel for applicant submits that applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. It is further submitted that the applicants are not named in F.I.R. The name of applicants are surfaced on the basis of confessional statement of other co-accused persons, who were arrested by the police in another case. It is further submitted that co-accused persons namely Nizam, Rohit and Lakhan Singh have been granted bail by Coordinate Bench of this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 4795 of 2024, 5239 of 2024 and 3687 of 2024 vide orders dated 12.02.2024, 15.02.2024 and 20.02.2024 respectively.
He has next argued that applicants have criminal history of two cases which has been duly explained in paragraph no. 20 of the affidavit, in which applicants has been granted bail vide order dated 14.03.2024 by Additional District and Sessions Judge, Agra. The applicants are languishing in jail since 26.02.2024.
Learned counsel for the applicant has relied upon the judgments of Apex Court in Ash Mohammad Vs. Shiv Raj Singh @ Lalla Babu and another, (2012) 9 SCC 446 and Prabhakar Tiwari Vs. State of U.P. and another, (2020) 11 SCC 648 wherein the Apex Court has observed that pendency of other criminal cases against the accused may itself cannot be a basis for refusal of bail.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, he does not deserve any indulgence. In case the applicant is released on bail, he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail.
In State of Rajasthan Vs. Balchand @ Baliay (1977) 4 SCC 308, the Apex Court observed that bail is the rule and committal to jail is an exception and refusal of bail is a restriction on the personal liberty of the individual guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution, which is reiterated in Gudikanti Narasimhulu And Ors Vs. Public Prosecutor, High Court Of Andhra Pradesh, AIR 1978 SC 429 and further reiterated in Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation & Another, (2021) 10 SCC 773.
No material or circumstances has been brought to the notice of this Court with regard to tampering of evidence or intimidating of witnesses in previous criminal history.
Keeping in mind, larger mandate of Article 21 of the constitution of India, the nature of accusations, the nature of evidence in support thereof, the severity of punishment which conviction will entail, the character of the accused-applicant, circumstances which are peculiar to the accused, reasonable possibility of securing the presence of the accused at the trial, reasonable apprehension of the witnesses being tampered with, the larger interest of the public/ State and other circumstances, but without expressing any opinion on the merits, I am of the view that it is a fit case for grant of bail.
Let the applicants Rahul @ Jitendra Kumar and Saurabh @ Saurabh Nauhwar be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on their furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions :-
(i) 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 or tamper with the evidence.
(ii) The applicants shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses.
(iii) 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 of Cr.P.C.
(iv) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in the trial court.
(v) The applicants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel.
(vi) The applicants shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. If in the opinion of the trial court that absence of the applicants is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed in accordance with law.
The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously in accordance with law after the release of the applicants, if there is no other legal impediment.
It is made clear that the observations made in this order are limited to the purpose of determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. The trial court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led unaffected by anything said in this order.
The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by the applicant alongwith a self attested identity proof of the said person (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number to which the said Aadhar Card is linked.
The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.
Order Date :- 1.4.2024
Sharad/-
