Allahabad High Court
Chand Alias Piluwa Alias Gatua vs State Of U.P. on 27 October, 2025
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:187928
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 44098 of 2024
Chand Alias Piluwa Alias Gatua
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)
:
Kartikey Singh, Narendra Pal Singh, Rajat Kumar Shukla, Rohit Shukla, Shashank Shekhar, Sheo Ram Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)
:
G.A.
Court No. - 73
HON'BLE SAMEER JAIN, J.
1. Heard Sri Rajat Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Imran Khan, learned A.G.A. for the State.
2. The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 283 of 2024, under Sections 394 and 411 I.P.C., Police Station- Highway, District-Mathura, during pendency of the trial in the court below.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that this is the second bail application filed on behalf of applicant and his first bail application has been dismissed on merits vide order dated 02.07.2024 but he is pressing instant second bail application on the ground that offences under Sections 394 and 411 I.P.C. are triable by Magistrate and applicant is in jail since 09.04.2024 i.e. for the last one and half years.
4. He next submits that a report was called from the court concerned about status of trial and as per the report received from the concerned court, witnesses are not appearing despite issuance of warrants against them. Therefore, there is no likelihood of early disposal of trial in the near future. He further submits, the delay in the trial is not attributable to the applicant.
5. He next submitted that apart from the present case, applicant is having criminal history of 48 other cases but his criminal history has been duly explained in the supplementary affidavit filed in support of this bail application. He next argued, in the majority of the cases, applicant has been made accused during the course of investigation like the present one. He also submits, applicant has already acquitted in several cases and in the remaining cases, he is on bail.
6. He further submits, the law is well-settled that if otherwise case of bail is made out then on the basis of criminal history of an accused his bail application should not be with held. Reliance has been placed on the judgment of the Hon?ble Supreme Court in Ayub Khan Vs. State of Rajasthan 2024 SCC OnLine SC 3763.
7. He further submits, therefore, considering the facts of the case applicant should be enlarged on bail.
8. Per contra, learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that this is the second bail application and the first bail application has been rejected after considering the fact that from the possession of applicant looted money of more than Rs. 1,00,000/- and some ornaments were recovered. He next submits even applicant is having criminal history of 48 other cases but he could not dispute the fact that the alleged offences are triable by Magistrate and applicant is in jail for the last more than one and a half years and till date not even single prosecution witness could be examined. He also could not dispute, even witnesses are not appearing before the trial court even though warrants are being issued against them.
9. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.
10. This is the second bail application filed by the applicant and his first bail application has been dismissed on merits after considering the fact that the looted money and articles were recovered from his possession but it reflects that all the alleged offences are triable by Magistrate and he is languishing in jail since more than one and a half years.
11. Considering the long incarceration of the applicant a report was called from the court concerned about the status of the trial and as per the report, till date not even single prosecution witness could be examined. Report further suggests that witnesses are not appearing before the trial court in spite of warrants have been issued against them, therefore, it reflects that without any fault of the applicant, the trial of the case is being lingered on and considering these facts there is no hope of early disposal of trial. Further, however, apart from the present case applicant is having criminal history of 48 other cases but his criminal history has been explained in supplementary affidavit filed in support of the instant bail application and it reflects that in the majority of the cases, applicant has been made accused during the investigation and in number of cases, he has been acquitted and in remaining cases he is on bail.
12. The Apex Court in the case of Ayub Khan (supra) observed as:-
"The presence of the antecedents of the accused is only one of the several considerations for deciding the prayer for bail made by him. In a given case, if the accused makes out a strong prima facie case, depending upon the fact situation and period of incarceration, the presence of antecedents may not be a ground to deny bail. There may be a case where a Court can grant bail only on the grounds of long incarceration. The presence of antecedents may not be relevant in such a case. In a given case, the Court may grant default bail. Again, the antecedents of the accused are irrelevant in such a case. Thus, depending upon the peculiar facts, the Court can grant bail notwithstanding the existence of the antecedents............." (See paragraph-10).
13. Further, law is settled that bail is rule and bail rejection is an exception and bail application should not be dismissed for punitive purpose.
14. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
15. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed.
16. Let the applicant-Chand Alias Piluwa Alias Gatua be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-
(i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted.
(ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
(iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity.
17. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant.
18. It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial.
(Sameer Jain,J.)
October 27, 2025
Anurag/-
