Allahabad High Court
Mantosh Kumar vs State Of U.P. on 26 June, 2025
Author: Siddharth
Bench: Siddharth
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:100026
Court No. - 66
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 21170 of 2025
Applicant :- Mantosh Kumar
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Mithilesh Kumar Shukla
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Pushpendra Vishvakarma
Hon'ble Siddharth,J.
Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Pushpendra Vishvakarma, learned counsel for the informant, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the material placed on record.
The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Mantosh Kumar, with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No.110 of 2023, under Sections 323, 308, 506 I.P.C., Police Station- Fariha, District- Firozabad (Case No.33838 of 2025), pendency of trial.
The submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is that there are cross versions of the incident registered by both the parties. Injuries have been caused to both the parties. It cannot be ascertained at this stage which party was the aggressor. The applicant alleges false implication in this case. The applicant is languishing in jail since 18.05.2025. In case he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.
Per contra learned A.G.A.as well as learned counsel for the informant have 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 deserves any indulgence. In case the applicant is released on bail, he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail.
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 Manish Sisodia vs. Directorate of Enforcement, 2024 LawSuit (SC) 677. 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.let the applicant involved in the aforesaid 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 with the following conditions that :-
(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.
In case, of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.
Order Date :- 26.6.2025
Mini
