Allahabad High Court
Virendra Singh @ Veeru vs State Of U.P. on 10 April, 2020
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?In Chamber Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11827 of 2020 Applicant :- Virendra Singh @ Veeru Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sudarshan Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble J.J. Munir,J.
This is an application for bail on behalf of the applicant, Virendra Singh @ Veeru in connection with Case Crime No. 481 of 2019, under Section 2(B)(V)/3 of the UP Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 P.S. Cantt. District Bareilly.
Perused the affidavit filed in support of the bail application as also the documents filed in support as annexures. The case set out in the affidavit in support of the application is that the applicant has been implicated in the present crime on account of a solitary case being Case Crime No. 111 of 2017 under Section 147, 353, 323 IPC, P.S. Cantt. District Bareilly, without there being any positive evidence to show that the applicant is a member or the leader of a gang. It has further been asserted in paragraph no. 6 of the affidavit that in the substantive case crime, the applicant has been admitted to bail by the learned Additional District Judge, Court No. 3, Bareilly vide order dated 19.02.2020 passed in Bail Application No. 264 of 2020. This Court has perused the said order, a copy of which is annexed as Annexure no. 3 to the affidavit. This Court has taken note of the office report which shows that bail applications of the other co-accused Gopi, Manoj @ Chhuttan, Deepak and Tinku have been disposed of by this Court. A perusal of those orders shows that the aforesaid co-accused have been admitted to bail by this Court in the present crime vide orders dated 07.01.2020, 20.01.2020 and 03.03.2020 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 753 of 2020, 3027 of 2020, 1003 of 2020 and 1005 of 2020, respectively. It is also said in the affidavit that the applicant is in jail since 12.02.2020.
Notice of this application was served upon learned GA on 29.02.2020 and the case is shown in the list of fresh cases today. No counter affidavit or written objection has been filed on behalf of the State.
Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of allegations, the gravity of the offence, the severity of punishment, the evidence appearing in the case, in particular, the fact that prima facie there is no positive evidence to show that the applicant is a member or the leader of a criminal gang, the fact that the applicant has been enlarged on bail in the substantive offence, which is a solitary case, the fact that five other co-accused, Gopi, Manoj @ Chhuttan, Deepak and Tinku identically circumstanced as the applicant, have been admitted to bail entitling the applicant to the benefit of parity, but without expressing any opinion on merits, this Court, finds it to be a fit case for bail.
The Division Bench of this Court in Public Interest Litigation (PIL) No. 564 of 2020 has taken note of unprecedented threat caused by Novel Corona Virus (Covid-19) on the one hand and the other, the difficulties that arise out of verification of sureties given the conditions of lockdown leading to obstruction in the execution of bail orders. In this regard, the Division Bench passed the following orders:
?(ii) It is brought to our notice that before enforcement of the lockdown different courts in the State of Uttar Pradesh including the High Court have granted orders to release the accused-applicants on bail but they have not been released so far due to non-availability of sureties.
Looking to impediments in arranging sureties because of lockdown, while invoking powers under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, we deem it appropriate to order that all the accused-applicants whose bail applications came to be allowed on or after 15th March, 2020 but have not been released due to non-availability of sureties as a consequence to lockdown may be released on executing personal bond as ordered by the Court or to the satisfaction of the jail authorities where such accused is imprisoned, provided the accused-applicants undertakes to furnish required sureties within a period of one month from the date of his/her actual release.?
In view of what has been said above, this Bail Application stands allowed.
Let the applicant Virendra Singh @ Veeru involved in Case Crime No. 481 of 2019, under Section 2(B)(V)/3 of the UP Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 P.S. Cantt. District Bareilly, be released on bail on his executing a personal bond before the Court concerned, provided the applicant undertakes to furnish two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned within one month of the date of his release from jail, subject to the the following conditions:
i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.
ii) The applicant shall not threaten or harass the prosecution witnesses.
iii) The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the Trial Court.
iv) The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which the applicant is accused, or suspected of the commission.
v) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade such person from disclosing facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
vi) The applicant shall cause to be filed before the Court empowered to release the applicant in compliance with this order a computer generated copy of this order downloaded from the official website of the Allahabad High Court.
vii) The computer generated copy of this order shall be attested by the learned Counsel for the applicant, who files that copy before the Court empowered to release.
viii) The Court concerned shall verify the authenticity of the said computer generated and attested copy of the order from the official website of the Allahabad High Court, and shall endorse in his hand a certification to the effect that he has undertaken a verification of the copy of this order as aforesaid in the manner above directed.
In case of default of any of the conditions nos. i) to v) enumerated above, the prosecution would be free to move an application for cancellation of bail before this Court.
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 of opinion on the merits of the case. It is further clarified that 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.
Order Date :- 10.4.2020 Deepak