Allahabad High Court
Jasmeet Singh Alias Mintu Bedi S/O Sri ... vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home on 18 August, 2022
Author: Shamim Ahmed
Bench: Shamim Ahmed
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH ?Court No. - 13 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5692 of 2022 Applicant :- Jasmeet Singh Alias Mintu Bedi S/O Sri Harjeet Singh Bedi Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Counsel for Applicant :- Riyaz Ahmad,Hemant Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ajai Kumar,Vivek Kumar Rai Hon'ble Shamim Ahmed,J.
Heard Shri Riyaz Ahmad, the learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Ajay Singh Tomar, the learned A.G.A. for the State as well as Shri Vivek Kumar Rai, the learned counsel for the informant and perused the record.
The applicant, Jasmeet Singh Alias Mintu Bedi, has moved the present bail application seeking bail in Case Crime No. 282 of 2021, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 387, 120-B I.P.C. read with Section 7 of Criminal Law Amendment Act, Police Station Alambagh, District Lucknow.
Learned counsel for the accused-applicant submits that applicant has falsely been implicated in the present case. The applicant is not named in the F.I.R. which was lodged on 27.10.2021. During the course of investigation statements of informant and other witnesses including the accused persons were recorded, wherein nothing has been stated by the accused persons in relation to the involvement of applicant in the crime.
Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that statements of some interested independent witnesses, namely, Japsahat, Sampreet and Mohan Kumar were recorded by the Investigating Officer and they presumed that only with intention to realize goonda tax from businessmen this incident was caused by the co-accused persons on the behest of the applicant, but there is no such evidence available on record. The entire statements of those independent witnesses were given only on the pressure created by the police with the collusion of informant.
Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that role of firing has been assigned to the main accused, namely, Deepak Makhija, from whom the applicant has no concern. There is no evidence for the involvement of applicant, neither he was involved in the incident of firing upon the deceased. He also submits that applicant was also implicated in other cases by the police and in that cases he is on bail, the details of all the cases have been given in para-49 of the affidavit filed in support of the bail application and also in paras-4 to 6 of the rejoinder affidavit filed in reply to the counter affidavit filed on behalf of State.
Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that recovery which was made by the police was falsely shown from the possession of applicant. Nothing has been recovered on his pointing out or from the possession of applicant and the same is totally false and has been made only with intention to falsely implicate the applicant.
Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that the co-accused, namely, Amar Jaiswal, Vinay Joshi, Bony alias Joginder Singh and Nitesh Bhatnagar, have already been granted bail by different coordinate Benches of this Court vide orders dated 12.04.2022, 05.04.2022, 22.02.2022 and 02.03.2022 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 3221, 3393, 3424 and 1924, all of the year, 2022, respectively. He further submits that other co-accused, whose names were taken along with the applicant, namely, Dilshad Ahmad alias Dilshad Siddiqui and Ratpal Singh alias Goldi Sardar, have also been granted bail by different coordinate Benches of this Court vide orders dated 05.03.2022 and 22.02.2022 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 2134 and 1633, both of the year, 2022.
Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that only on the basis of Mazeed statement the name of application was taken by the main accused, Deepak Makhija @ Neeshu, that the applicant had given him pistol for committing the said crime, which was only made on the pressure created by the police, whereas, in his statement recorded on 11.11.2021 he has stated nothing regarding the applicant. He further submits that the persons against whom there was direct allegation regarding their involvement in the alleged crime, namely, Amar Jaiswal, Vinay Joshi, Bony alias Joginder Singh and Nitesh Bhatnagar, and the persons whose names were taken along with the applicant, namely, Dilshad Ahmad alias Dilshad Siddiqui and Ratpal Singh alias Goldi Sardar, have already been granted bail, therefore, the case of applicant is not on the worse footing than that of the co-accused, who have already been granted bail, therefore, applicant should be released on bail by this Court sympathetically.
Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused have also been touched upon at length. It has been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required and is also ready to accept all the conditions which the Court may deem fit to impose upon him. It has also been pointed out that history of criminal cases against the applicant has been explained in para-49 of the affidavit filed in support of the bail application and also in paras-4 to 6 of the rejoinder affidavit filed in reply to the counter affidavit filed on behalf of State. The applicant is in jail since 13.11.2021 and has already undergone a substantial period in detention. In the wake of heavy pendency of cases in the Court, there is no blinking chances of any early conclusion of trial.
Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the informant have opposed the prayer for bail and submit that applicant is involved in heinous crime and his role is similar to the co-accused, Deepak Makhija @ Neeshu, to whom he had given pistol for committing the murder and recovery was made on his pointing out, therefore, he is directly involved, thus, his bail application shall be rejected straightway.
After perusing the record in the light of the submissions made at the Bar and after taking an overall view of all the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence, the period of detention already undergone, the unlikelihood of early conclusion of trial and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence, and considering the fact that applicant was not named in the F.I.R., nor his involvement was shown by the informant by the statements of any other witnesses and first time his name was taken by interested witnesses, namely, Japsahat, Sampreet and Mohan Kumar, along with two other co-accused, Dilshad Ahmad alias Dilshad Siddiqui and Ratpal Singh alias Goldi Sardar, and it was mentioned by these witnesses in their statements that applicant and co-accused, Dilshad Ahmad alias Dilshad Siddiqui and Ratpal Singh alias Goldi Sardar were involved in the crime and they helped the main accused, Deepak Makhija @ Neeshu in firing; the name of applicant was taken by the interested witnesses without any evidence available on record; there was no evidence against the applicant to show his involvement in the crime; the main accused, Deepak Makhija @ Neeshu in his statement has not stated anything regarding involvement of applicant and in his Mazeed statement recorded on 06.11.2021 first time he has stated that pistol was supplied by the application to him for committing the alleged crime, this statement appears to be made by the pressure created by him; the persons against whom there was direct allegation regarding their involvement in the alleged crime, namely, Amar Jaiswal, Vinay Joshi, Bony alias Joginder Singh and Nitesh Bhatnagar, and the persons whose names were taken along with the applicant, namely, Dilshad Ahmad alias Dilshad Siddiqui and Ratpal Singh alias Goldi Sardar, have already been granted bail and the case of applicant is not on the worse footing than that of the co-accused; as well as further considering the larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh vs. State of UP and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22, this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.
The prayer for bail is granted. The application is allowed.
Let the applicant, Jasmeet Singh Alias Mintu Bedi, involved in Case Crime No. 282 of 2021, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 387, 120-B I.P.C. read with Section 7 of Criminal Law Amendment Act, Police Station Alambagh, District Lucknow, be enlarged on bail on his executing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned on the following conditions :-
(1) The applicant will not make any attempt to tamper with the prosecution evidence in any manner whatsoever.
(2) The applicant will personally appear on each and every date fixed in the court below and his personal presence shall not be exempted unless the court itself deems it fit to do so in the interest of justice.
(3) The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.
(4) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.
(5) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail 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.
(6) 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 default of this condition is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.
(7) The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad or certified copy issued from the Registry of the High Court, Allahabad.
(8) The concerned Court/ Authority/ Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.
It may be observed that in the event of any breach of the aforesaid conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to proceed for the cancellation of applicant's bail.
It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of the bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merit of the case.
Order Date :- 18.8.2022 Mustaqeem