Allahabad High Court
Indresh Kumar Yadav @ Kallu And Another vs State Of U.P. on 15 July, 2021
Author: Sanjay Kumar Pachori
Bench: Sanjay Kumar Pachori
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 68 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 19365 of 2021 Applicant :- Indresh Kumar Yadav @ Kallu And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Prashant Kanha,Nikhil Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.
Heard Shri Nikhil Kumar, learned counsel for the applicants, Shri Nitin Kesarwani, learned A.G.A. and perused the record of the case.
The present bail application has been filed on behalf of applicants, Indresh Kumar Yadav @ Kallu and Ashish Kumar Yadav with a prayer to release them on bail in Case Crime No. 0016 of 2021, under Section 3(1) of U.P. Gangster & Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, Police Station- Sarpataha, District- Jaunpur during pendency of trial.
Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that in the gang chart four cases have been shown against the applicants which have been explained in paragraph no.6 & 7 of the affidavit and in all the cases applicants are on bail. Copies of the bail orders have been annexed along with the affidavit filed in support of the bail application. It has also been submitted that the applicants are not involved in any anti-social activities and they have been falsely implicated. The copy of the gang chart has been annexed as Annexure-1 to the affidavit. There is also one case against the applicant Indresh Kumar Yadav @ Kallu bearing case crime no.22 of 2021, under Section 120B, 115, IPC in which he has been granted bail by the court below on 13.4.2021. Co-accused Sikandar, Ravi Prakash @ Sachin, Vipin Kumar, Saddam @ Bhunai and Ikrar Khan have been granted bail by this Court vide orders dated 8.4.2021, 22.3.2021, 18.3.2021, 18.3.2021 & 8.4.2021 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos.12160 of 2021, 14189 of 2021, 14265 of 2021, 14309 of 2021 & 15389 of 2021 respectively. It is next submitted that there is also no possibility of the applicants either fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses. The applicants, who are languishing in jail since 3.3.2021, undertakes that they will not misuse the liberty, if granted. It has also been pointed out that in the wake of heavy pendency of cases in the Court, there is no likelihood of any early conclusion of trial.
Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail of the applicants by contending that the innocence of the applicants cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, they do not deserve any indulgence. In case the applicants are released on bail, they will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail. Learned A.G.A. has not pointed out any other case against the applicants except the cases shown in the gang chart.
It is settled position of law that bail is the rule and committal to jail is an exception in the case of State of Rajasthan Vs. Balchand @ Baliay (1977) 4 SCC 308, the Apex Court observed that refusal of bail is a restriction on the personal liberty of the individual guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution and opined para 2 "The basic rule may perhaps be tersely put as bail, not jail, except where there are circumstances suggestive of fleeing from justice or thwarting the course of justice or creating other troubles in the shape of repeating offences or intimidating witnesses and the like, by the petitioner who seeks enlargement on bail from the court. We do not intend to be exhaustive but only illustrative" and considering the facts of the case and keeping in mind, the ratio of the Apex Court's judgment in the case of Gudikanti Narasimhulu And Ors vs Public Prosecutor, High Court Of Andhra Pradesh, AIR 1978 SC 429, larger mandate of Article 21 of the constitution of India, the nature of accusations, the nature of evidence in support thereof, the severity of punishment which conviction will entail, the character of the accused-applicant, circumstances which are peculiar to the accused, reasonable possibility of securing the presence of the accused at the trial, reasonable apprehension of the witnesses being tampered with, the larger interest of the public/ State and other circumstances, but without expressing any opinion on the merits, I am of the view that it is a fit case for grant of bail.
Let applicants, Indresh Kumar Yadav @ Kallu and Ashish Kumar Yadav be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on their furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions-
(ii) The applicants 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 them under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(iii) In case, the applicants misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicants fail to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against them, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(iv) The applicants 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 them in accordance with law.
It is clarified that anything said in this order is limited to the purpose of determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. The trial court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led unaffected by anything said in this order.
The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by the petitioner alongwith a self attested identity proof of the said person (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number to which the said Aadhar Card is linked.
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.
Order Date :- 15.7.2021 T. Sinha