Allahabad High Court
Harvinder Singh @ Jugnu Walia vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. on 10 March, 2025
Author: Rajesh Singh Chauhan
Bench: Rajesh Singh Chauhan
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:14632
Court No. - 11
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12650 of 2024
Applicant :- Harvinder Singh @ Jugnu Walia
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.
Counsel for Applicant :- Riyaz Ahmad,Hemant Kumar Pandey
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ajai Kumar,Vivek Kumar Rai
Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.
1 Counter affidavit filed on behalf of the informant is taken on record.
2. Heard Sri Riyaz Ahmad, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ranvijay Singh learned A.G.A. for the State and Sri Ajai Kumar,, learned counsel for the informant.
3. As per learned counsel for the applicant, the present applicant is languishing in jail since 08.11.2023 in Case Crime No.282 of 2021, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 387, 120-B IPC and Section 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act, Police Station- Alambagh, District- Lucknow. He has been falsely implicated in this case as he has not committed any offence as alleged in the prosecution story.
4. Attention has been drawn towards impugned FIR, wherein the allegation has been levelled against Jaspreet Singh @ Lavish, Deepak Makhija @ Nishu and one more person. However, during course of investigation, the complicity of ten accused persons have been found including two named accused persons. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the present applicant was not named in the FIR nor any allegation has been levelled against him but charge-sheet has been filed against the present applicant. Two named accused persons namely Jaspreet Singh @ Lavish and Deepak Makhija @ Nishu have already been granted bail by this Court vide orders dated 31.05.2023 & 15.05.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos.7328/2023 & 1081/2023. Besides all other co-accused persons have been granted bail as their bail orders have been enclosed collectively as Annexure-32.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that in the present case, the role attributed to the present applicant is one of the conspirators, inasmuch as, he was admittedly not present at the spot or place of incident, therefore, he has been implicated pursuant to the Section 120-B I.P.C.
Learned counsel has drawn attention of this Court towards the dictums of Apex Court in the case of Maulana Mohd. Amir Rashadi vs. State of U.P. and another, wherein, the Apex Court vide judgment and order dated 16th January, 2012 has observed that if the complicity of accused-applicant is not found in the incident in question, only on the basis of his criminal history, his bail application may not be denied. However, the Hon'ble Apex Court in re: Prabhakar Tiwari vs. State of U.P. and another reported in 2020 (11) SCC, has also held that the criminal history of any accused persons may not be the sole reason to deny the bail application.
Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the present applicant is having criminal history of twenty four (24) cases, out of those criminal cases, eleven (11) cases have been finalized. In thirteen (13) cases, he has been enlarged on bail. The applicant undertakes that he shall cooperate in the investigation, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall abide by all terms and conditions of bail, if granted.
6. Learned AGA has stated that the present applicant has been implicated in the case as he was one of the conspirators, however, he was not present on the spot.
7. Sri Ajai Kumar, learned counsel for the informant has opposed the aforesaid bail application by submitting that though all co-accused persons have been granted bail but the present applicant being a conspirator had conspired the plot to commit the crime in question, therefore, his bail may be rejected. He has also stated that the other co-accused persons whose bail have been granted are not having any criminal history but the present applicant is having criminal history of so many cases. However, he has not disputed on the point that the present applicant has been enlarged on bail in all other cases. He has also stated that even if, the present applicant was not present on the spot but his role was serious.
8. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the material available on record; considering the fact that thepresent applicant was not named in the FIR nor any allegation has been levelled against him but charge-sheet has been filed against the present applicant; two named accused persons namely Jaspreet Singh @ Lavish and Deepak Makhija @ Nishu have already been granted bail by this Court vide orders dated 31.05.2023 & 15.05.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos.7328/2023 & 1081/2023; and the undertaking that the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall abide by all terms and conditions of the bail order and he shall cooperate in the trial proceedings properly, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I am of the view that the present applicant may be enlarged on bail.
9. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.
10. Let the applicant (Harvinder Singh @ Jugnu Walia), involved in aforesaid 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 with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-
(i) 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.
(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(iii) 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.may be issued and if 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.
(iv) 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.
(v) The applicant shall not leave the country without permission of the Court concerned.
Order Date :- 10.3.2025
Reena/-
(Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.)
