Allahabad High Court
Raj Pachauri vs State Of U.P. And Another on 28 May, 2024
Author: Saurabh Shyam Shamshery
Bench: Saurabh Shyam Shamshery
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:96635
Court No. - 65
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL CANCELLATION APPLICATION No. - 169 of 2022
Applicant :- Raj Pachauri
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Avdhesh Narayan Tiwari
Counsel for Opposite Party :- Ajay Sengar,G.A.
Hon'ble Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J.
1. Heard Sri Sarvesh Kumar Dubey, learned counsel for applicant, Sri R.K. Mishra, learned AGA and Sri Deepak Dubey, learned counsel for accused.
2. Applicant has approached this Court for cancellation of bail of accused granted by coordinate Bench of this Court on 29.11.2017 in Case Crime No. 94/2017 under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 307, 504, 506/34 IPC and 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act, Police Station- Madhogarh, District- Jalaun.
3. Learned counsel for applicant submits that accused i.e. opposite party no.2 was granted bail by coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 29.11.2017 and he refers conditions prescribed therein :-
?Let applicant Shivam Gurjar be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions :-
(i) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity.
(ii) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.
(iii) The applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses.
(iv) The applicant shall regularly appear on the dates fixed by the trial court unless his personal attendance is exempted by the trial court.
In case of default of any of the conditions enumerated above, it will be open to the opposite parties to approach the Court for cancellation of bail.?
4. Learned counsel further submits that aforesaid conditions were violated by accused and soon after he came out on bail, he indulged in criminal activities and on his instructions, his associates extended threats and made attempt to murder of applicant; a prompt FIR was lodged by applicant, wherein after investigation, a charge sheet has been filed.
5. Learned counsel further submits that accused was also involved in other criminal cases and even is not cooperating in investigation; he also refers that during trial of present case, statements of witnesses are being recorded and trial is proceeding; he also refers an order passed by coordinate Bench in case of co-accused who has approached this Court by way of filing an Application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. No. 13044/2020 wherein coordinate Bench has directed that trial would go in present case but it will not be concluded prior to a case filed under Gangster Act.
6. Per contra, learned counsel for accused submits that accused is not involved directly in any of subsequent crime whereas the applicant is taking all endeavour that his bail may be cancelled whereas they are not appearing in a case of rape lodged against them; trial is proceeding in present case and no instance has been brought on record of trial Court, that witnesses have not fearlessly deposed during trial; he also refers that witnesses have not approached concerned Authority to take protection under Witness Protection Scheme, 2018; he also points out that presently accused is inside jail in other case.
7. Heard learned counsel for parties and perused the record.
8. Law in regard to cancellation of bail has been reiterated by Supreme Court in Himanshu Sharma vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, 2024 SCC Online SC 187 and relevant para is quoted below -:
?12. Law is well settled by a catena of judgments rendered by this Court that the considerations for grant of bail and cancellation thereof are entirely different. Bail granted to an accused can only be cancelled if the Court is satisfied that after being released on bail, (a) the accused has misused the liberty granted to him; (b) flouted the conditions of bail order; (c) that the bail was granted in ignorance of statutory provisions restricting the powers of the Court to grant bail; (d) or that the bail was procured by misrepresentation or fraud. In the present case, none of these situations existed.?
9. Crux of argument of learned counsel for applicant is that accused has violated the conditions and he is indulged in criminal activities after coming out on bail. An FIR was lodged against accused wherein after investigation, charge sheet has been filed as well as there are other subsequent criminal cases also, as such, prima facie accused has violated the conditions.
10. Court takes note of material on record and finds that subsequently accused was directly or indirectly involved in criminal activities wherein after investigation, charge sheet has also been filed, though he was released on bail therein also.
11. Learned counsel for accused has mainly submitted that trial is proceeding and it is not on record that witnesses have not fearlessly deposed. In this regard, Court takes note that aforesaid submissions have not seriously disputed by learned counsel for applicant. Bail was granted in the year 2017 and alleged subsequent occurrence took place in the year 2021. Present status of trial of subsequent charge sheet is also not on record.
12. Therefore, in view of aforesaid circumstances, at this stage it is not on record that witnesses have not able to depose fearlessly before trial Court as well as that Court also takes note that witnesses have not taken benefit of Scheme of 2018 though it is a duty of concerned Investigating Officer also to inform about it. Bail granted to accused could be cancelled if there is any violation of condition though prima facie as referred above, there is a violation of condition. However, there are other factors also such as nature of evidence before trial Court is not on record; it is not a specific stand of applicant that witnesses have not able to fearlessly depose before trial Court and that trial has already substantially progressed and in this regard, Court also takes note that accused is presently behind bars, therefore, I do not find any ground or material to cancel bail granted to accused, therefore, prayer for bail is rejected.
13. However, this application is disposed of with a direction to accused that he will appear before trial Court on each and every date. In case any application for exemption is filed on vague grounds if he is out of jail, trial Court will be at liberty to reject such application and to cancel bail of accused.
14. It is also directed that applicant shall bring on record the present orders, if any bail application is filed in other cases, where he is still in jail.
Order Date :- 28.5.2024
N. Sinha
