Allahabad High Court
Prahlad Gurjar vs State Of U.P. on 11 April, 2023
Author: Deepak Verma
Bench: Deepak Verma
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 87 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 16730 of 2022 Applicant :- Prahlad Gurjar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Yogesh Kumar Srivastava,Amit Daga,Noor Muhammad Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Deepak Dubey Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J.
Heard Sri Udai Karan Saxena, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Noor Muhammad, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Deepak Dubey, learned counsel for the informant, Sri Vinod Kumar Rai, learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record.
This first bail application has been filed with a prayer to release the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 86 of 2021, registered under Sections 2/3 of U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, Police Station Nawabad District Jhansi during pendency of the trial.
In the instant case, 14 accused persons have been implicated under the Gangster Act and involved in Case Crime No.344 of 2018, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 307, 506, 120-B I.P.C.
Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. Applicant has been released on bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court by order dated 23.07.2019. Applicant has criminal history of four other cases, which have been explained in para 6 of the bail application and in all the cases applicant has been granted bail. Co-accused, namely, Rohit @ Rohitas has been granted bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court by order dated 22.12.2022. Applicant has not flouted any condition of the order and imposition of Gangster Act against the applicant is illegal and applicant should be released on bail. The applicant is languishing in jail since 24.09.2021. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and co-operate in trial.
Per contra, Sri Deepak Dubey, learned counsel for the informant has vehemently opposed the bail prayer of the applicant and submits that in Case Crime No.344 of 2018, under Sections 302, 307, 506, 147, 148, 149, 120-B I.P.C. applicant while granting bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court concealed the material facts which was verified by order dated 15.09.2021 passed by co-ordinate Bench of this Court and co-accused, namely, Rajendra Gurjar, Bhupendra Singh @ Pushpendra and Kamlesh Yadav bail have been rejected. He next argued that applicant has violated the condition of bail order granted to him and there are immense danger to life of the informant and his family members. Co-accused, namely, Sanchit Verma was granted bail by order dated 18.11.2021 and the same was challenged before Hon'ble The Apex Court by filing SLP No.30140 of 2021. The Hon'ble Apex Court was pleased to stay the effect of the bail order dated 18.11.2021. He further pointed out that applicant's act is not very fair and there is chances of absconding if the applicant released on bail. In earlier circumstances, applicant's name came into light in two cases and the applicant remain absconding and reward of Rs.10,000/- imposed upon him. He next argued that in Criminal Appeal No.1827 of 2022 Hon'ble The Apex Court vide its order dated 20.10.2022 allowed the bail with following observations:-
"Leave granted.
Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order dated 18.11.2021 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 13264 of 2021, by which the High Court has allowed the said application preferred by respondent No.2-original accused and released him on bail, the original informant has preferred the present appeal.
At the outset, it is required to be noted that, while issuing notice, vide order dated 17.12.2021, this Court has stayed the order passed by the High Court, releasing the respondent-accused on bail which has been continued till date.
Shri Siddharth Dave, learned Senior Advocate, appearing for the respondent No.2 is not inviting any further reasoned order while quashing and setting aside the impugned order passed by the High Court releasing the accused on bail. However, it is requested that as the trial has already begun and two witnesses are already examined and/or being examined, the trial may be expedited and to reserve the liberty in favour of the accused to move the Court for 2 fresh bail application, in case the trial is not concluded at the earliest.
The prayer is not opposed by the counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner as well as the State.
In view of the above, we set aside the impugned order passed by the High Court releasing the accused on bail.
We direct the trial Court to finally decide and dispose of and conclude the trial at the earliest and preferably within a period of 12 months from today.
All concerned are directed to cooperate with the learned trial Court in early disposal of the trial and within the time stipulated hereinabove. It is the duty cast upon the State to present the witnesses before the Court for their examination, as and when directed by the learned trial Court. In case for any reason not attributable to the accused, the trial is not concluded within the time stipulated hereinabove, it will be open for respondent No.2- accused to move a fresh bail application before the trial Court which may be considered in accordance with law and on its own merits.
The present Appeal is, accordingly, allowed to the aforesaid extent."
Learned AGA has also filed counter affidavit and submitted therein that applicant has criminal history of five cases and reward of Rs.10,000/- has also been imposed upon him by M.P. Police Authority for absconding and applicant is of criminal in nature and committed present crime in question and credible evidence has been collected against him.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, applicant's involvement has been found in the alleged offence and involvement in other crimes and the Gangster Act has been imposed as preventive measure. It is also evident from Hon'ble The Apex Court judgment passed in Criminal Appeal No.1827 of 2022 in which the Hon'ble Apex Court has considered the submission of counsel that trial has begun and two witnesses have been examined in the present case and considering this fact, directed the trial court to finally decide and dispose off and conclude the trial at the earliest and preferably within a period of 12 months from today.
In view of the above observation of Hon'ble the Apex Court and looking to seriousness and gravity of offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the applicant.
Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant-Prahlad Gurjar, involved in the aforesaid case crime, is hereby rejected at this stage.
Order Date :- 11.4.2023 Nitin Verma (Deepak Verma, J.)