Allahabad High Court
Gaurav Bhati vs State Of U.P. on 19 November, 2024
Author: Krishan Pahal
Bench: Krishan Pahal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:181140
Court No. - 65
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 42364 of 2024
Applicant :- Gaurav Bhati
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Ramesh Kumar Pandey
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.
1. List has been revised.
2. Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record.
3. Heard Sri Ramesh Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri Amit Kumar, learned State Law Officer for the State and perused the record.
4. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.241 of 2020, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 307, 323, 506 I.P.C. and 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act, Police Station- Dadri, District- Gautam Budh Nagar, during the pendency of trial.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The applicant was named in the FIR, but after thorough investigation, the police was pleased to file closure report qua applicant and co-accused person, as such, during trial after the statement of PW-1, the applicant has been summoned by the trial court vide order dated 4.2.2023 by invoking powers under Section 319 Cr.P.C.
6. Learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that the co-accused person had challenged the said summoning order by filing Criminal Revision No.1047 of 2023 and the same has been allowed vide order dated 18.4.3023 by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court.
7. Learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that the criminal history of two cases assigned to the applicant stands explained vide supplementary affidavit filed today in Court. Even the judgment of the Supreme Court passed in Hardeep Singh vs. State of Punjab, AIR 2014 SC 1400 has not been properly followed, as such, the applicant is entitled for bail.
8. Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicant to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against him. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicant have also been touched upon at length. The applicant is languishing in jail since 15.10.2024 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.
9. Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application.
10. The Supreme Court in Prabhakar Tewari Vs. State of U.P. and another, 2020 (11) SCC 648 has observed that pendency of several criminal cases against an accused itself cannot be a basis for refusal of bail, if otherwise his case of bail is made out.
11. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, and taking into consideration the settled law of the Supreme Court passed in Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and Ors., 2022 INSC 690 and Manish Sisodia vs. Directorate of Enforcement, 2024 INSC 595 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.
12. Let the applicant- Gaurav Bhati, who is involved in aforementioned case crime 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 evidence.
(ii) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the Trial Court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) 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.
13. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
14. It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.
Order Date :- 19.11.2024
Vikas
(Justice Krishan Pahal)
