Allahabad High Court
Shankar Singh vs State Of U.P. on 7 November, 2024
Author: Siddharth
Bench: Siddharth
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:175392
Reserved On:- 24.10.2024
Delivered On:- 07.11.2024
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 36283 of 2024
Applicant :- Shankar Singh
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Rajiv Kumar Tripathi
Counsel for Opposite Party :- Vijay Singh Sengar,G.A.
Hon'ble Siddharth, J.
1. Heard Sri Rajiv Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant; Sri Vijay Singh Sengar, learned counsel for the informant; learned A.G.A for the State and perused the material placed on record.
2. There is allegation against the applicant and four named accused, namely, Mangal Singh, Govind Singh, Atar Singh and Babbu Raja, are that they intercepted the informant in the way and snatched his gold chain and Rs. 1,200/- and also caused fire arm injury him.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that it is a case of false implication. With regard to the incident dated 04.07.2010 application was given before the Magistrate on 31.07.2010 under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C., and F.I.R was lodged on 01.09.2010. Co-accused, Mangal Singh, having similar role was enlarged on bail by this court vide Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 34378 of 2018 on 27.09.2018. The applicant was summoned by the Magistrate on the protest petition on 14.04.2011 which was challenged by him by filing a Criminal Misc. Application U/S 482 Cr.P.C. No. 30920 of 2011 wherein he was granted interim order but since the interim order was not extended the applicant was arrested and sent to jail and is languishing in jail since 16.03.2024. He has criminal history of 19 cases explained in paragraph 20 of affidavit in support of bail application. Out of 19 cases in his criminal history he was wrongly named in two cases and was not wanted in four cases. In two cases final report has been submitted and in case under Goondas Act he was only punished with six months externment which has been completed. In the remaining cases, he is on bail except one case. Co-accused, Mangal Singh, has already been enlarged on bail by this court who was having criminal history of 11 cases. In view of the above, the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.
4. Learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A have vehemently opposed the submissions of counsel for the applicant and have submitted that in case the applicant is released on bail, he would cause further committed crime. Subsequently, the applicant has been implicated the informant in the case of murder. Keeping in view the criminal antecedents of the applicant, he is not entitled to be enlarged on bail.
5. 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, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, considering the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 and 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 and 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.
6. Let the applicant, Shankar Singh, involved in Case Crime No. 1115 of 2010, (S.T. No. 26 of 2011, State vs. Mangal Singh and Others), under Sections- 395 and 397 IPC, Police Station- Kotwali Kalpi, District- Jalaun, be released on bail on his 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.
(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.
(ii) The applicant 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 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.
(iii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(iv) In case the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation then the Trial Court shall initiate proceedings against him in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(v) The applicant 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 absence of the applicant 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 against him in accordance with law.
7. In case, of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
8. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.
Order Date :- 07.11.2024
Rohit
