Allahabad High Court
Shailendra Kumar Yadav vs State Of U.P. on 26 November, 2019
Author: Jaspreet Singh
Bench: Jaspreet Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH ?Court No. - 6 Case :- BAIL No. - 4662 of 2018 Applicant :- Shailendra Kumar Yadav Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rachit Sondhi,Anoj Kumar,Brij Mohan Sahai,Gyaneshwar Prasad Pandey,Sanjay Kumar Verma Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Jaspreet Singh,J.
Heard Shri Brij Mohan Sahai, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Shiv Nath Tilahri, learned A.G.A. for the State-respondent and also perused the record.
The submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant has falsely been implicated in Case Crime No.5 of 2017, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC and Section 3/25 Arms Act and Section 18 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967.
The submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant has no criminal history and the applicant is languishing in jail since 09.03.2017.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that in the First Information Report, a copy of which has been annexed as Annexure no.1 with the bail application. It has been alleged that the applicant is alleged to have supplied certain arms to a gang. Upon the aforesaid information, the applicant was tracked on the information received from an informant and thereafter on 09.03.2017 at around 12.10 a.m. while the applicant was driving an Alto Car U.P. 79 B-2270 near D.S. School Tiraha, the applicant was stopped and while he was searched, it is alleged that a .32 bore country made pistol alongwith two live cartridges were found in his possession and later upon interrogation the applicant is alleged to have informed that he had sold a pistol in the month of March, 2017 to Fakrey Alam. It has been submitted that the applicant has been in jail since 09.03.2017 coupled with the fact that the charge-sheet which has been filed in the aforesaid case crime number wherein only two material witnesses have been mentioned whose statements have also been brought on record by the learned counsel for the applicant alongwith his rejoinder-affidavit. It has further been submitted that from the perusal of the statement recorded under Sections 161 Cr.P.C. and the statement recorded under Sections 164 Cr.P.C. of the witnesses Anuj Kumar @ Golu and Ajai Kumar Yadav, it would reveal that the allegations against the applicant are not made out especially in light of Section which has been imposed against the applicant. It has been submitted that there is no independent witness and moreover there is no chance for the applicant to influence the trial or the witnesses and the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail.
Learned A.G.A. Shri Tilahri has opposed the prayer for bail and has submitted that the anti terrorist squad had apprehended Saifullah Khan who was involved in the Ujjan (M.P.) train blast conspiracy and from his interrogation it reveals that a certain person had supplied arms to the aforesaid gang who were involved in the train blast. He has also submitted that upon the interrogation of Saifullah Khan another person, namely, Faisal was apprehended and upon his interrogation, the name of another co-accused Raghvendra Singh Chauhan was also revealed and it is on the basis of the statement given by the Fakrey Alam, the name of the applicant surfaced and it is in this fashion that the applicant was also arrested as he is also involved as he has been supplying arms and therefore it has been submitted that the applicant is not entitled to be released on bail. Learned A.G.A. has also informed that the bail of the another co-accused, namely, Fakrey Alam who had moved second bail application before this Court bearing Bail Application No.9986 of 2018 was also rejected by this Court by means of order dated 05.04.2019.
Replying in rejoinder, learned counsel for the applicant Shri Brij Mohan Sahai has vehemently urged that the section involved in the First Information Report as well as the statement of the witnesses under Section 164 which has been annexed and brought on record alongwith the rejoinder-affidavit does not disclose the commission of any such offence. He has also brought to the notice of the Court that another person who was apprehended, namely, Raghvendra Singh Chauhan has already been released on bail by this Court by means of order dated 11.10.2018 in Bail No.10203 of 2017 and thus the applicant is also entitled to be released on bail coupled with the fact that the applicant has no criminal history.
Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and on the perusal of the record, it would indicate that as far as the submissions of the learned counsel for the applicant is concerned that the statement recorded of the witnesses under Section 164 Cr.P.C. as well as the fact that the charge-sheet has already been filed in light of the allegations contained in the First Information Report as well as the submission of the learned A.G.A. regarding the involvement of the applicant in supplying arms to the gang which was involved in the Ujjain train blast is yet to be tested in trial.
Considering the facts and circumstances and the material available on record including the allegations made against the applicant, the severity of the punishment which will be inflicted on the applicant if convicted as well as the material available on record and without expressing any opinion on merit, this Court is of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
Let the applicant Shailendra Kumar Yadav involved in Case Crime No.5 of 2017, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC, Section 3/25 Arms Act and Section 18 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967, relating to police station A.T.S., District Lucknow be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two heavy sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:
(i) The applicant will not try to influence the witnesses or tamper with the evidence of the case or otherwise misuse the liberty of bail.
(ii) The applicant will fully cooperate in expeditious disposal of the case and shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when witnesses are present in the Court.
(iii) The applicant will not indulge in any unlawful activities.
(iv) The applicant will not leave the district without seeking permission from the court concerned.
(v) The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant in prison.
Order Date :- 26.11.2019 ank