Allahabad High Court
Sonu Sharma vs State Of U.P. on 17 May, 2024
Author: Krishan Pahal
Bench: Krishan Pahal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:89753 Court No. - 71 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 51354 of 2023 Applicant :- Sonu Sharma Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Manish Kumar Tripathi,Rishabh Agrawal Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.
1. List has been revised.
2. Heard Sri Amit Kumar, Advocate holding brief of Ms. Swati Agarwal, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Arun Kumar Mishra, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 0395 of 2023, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B of I.P.C. and Sections 4/10 of Examination Act, Police Station - Wave City, District - Ghaziabad, during the pendency of trial.
4. As per prosecution story, the applicant was arrested by authorities when he was found appearing in the examination of UPSSSC in place of Ankit Sharma by impersonation on 29.10.2023.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. He has nothing to do with the said offence as alleged in the FIR. It is further stated that no documents were found from his possession by the authorities.
6. 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. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 29.10.2023. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate with trial.
7. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that the aadhar card of Ankit Sharma was found from the possession of the applicant. However, he could not dispute the fact that the applicant has no criminal history.
8. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, pending trial and considering the complicity of accused, severity of punishment, at this stage, 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.
9. Let the applicant- Sonu Sharma, 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.
10. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
11. 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:- 17.5.2024 Siddhant (Justice Krishan Pahal)