Allahabad High Court
Manish Paal @ Bhaina vs State Of U.P. Though It Principal ... on 6 October, 2023
Author: Siddharth
Bench: Siddharth
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:193122 Court No. - 64 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 35865 of 2023 Applicant :- Manish Paal @ Bhaina Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Though It Principal Secretary And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Atul Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Pankaj Bharti Hon'ble Siddharth,J.
Heard Sri Atul Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant; Sri Pankaj Bharti, learned counsel for informant as well as the learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record.
The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Manish Paal @ Bhaina, with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 44 of 2023, under Sections 376(3) 511 IPC and Section 3,4(2)18 of POCSO Act, Police Station Budhana, District- Muzaffar Nagar, during pendency of trial.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that initially the applicant was enlarged on bail by this Court for committing the alleged offences under Sections 452, 354-B, 354D, 323, 504, 506, 307, 325 and Section 7/8 of POCSO Act, vide order dated 06.07.2023 passed in Bail Application No. 15420 of 2023. Learned counsel for applicant has further submitted that Investigating Officer submitted the police report wherein implication of the applicant under Section 376(2)/511 IPC and Section 3,4(2)18 of POCSO Act was further made. The applicant applied for bail under the added sections which was rejected by court below on 25.07.2023. Hence, this bail applicant has been moved. The applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. He is languishing in jail since 08.02.2023. The trial in the aforesaid case is not likely to be concluded in near future.
Learned counsel for informant has filed a counter-affidavit, is stating that in the present case charge-sheet was submitted on 01.04.2023 and cognizance was taken there on 05.04.2023. Charges were framed against the applicant on 12.06.2023. Applicant had moved second bail application under the added sections before trial court which was rejected by the trial court on 04.07.2023, but he pressed his first bail application before this Court without disclosing the aforesaid facts and obtained bail on 06.07.2023 from this Court under the earlier sections. He has further submitted that the applicant is not entitled to be enlarged on bail under the added sections since there is sufficient material collected against him by the Investigating Officer.
Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, he does not deserves any indulgence. In case the applicant is released on bail he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail.
After hearing the rival contentions, this Court finds that bail is granted to an accused regarding an offence and by mere change in sections by the Investigating Officer, he cannot be denied bail. He is already languishing in jail since 08.02.2023.
Having considered the submissions of the parties noted above, finding force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant, keeping in view the uncertainty regarding conclusion of trial; one sided investigation by police, ignoring the case of accused side; applicant being under-trial having fundamental right to speedy trial; larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, considering the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil Vs. C.B.I. & Another, passed in S.L.P.(Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021, judgement dated 11.7.2022 and considering 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above their capacity by under trials and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, let the applicant involved in the aforesaid 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 with the following conditions that :-
(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.
(ii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in Court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.
(iii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(iv) In case the applicant misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his 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 him in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(v) The applicant 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 him in accordance with law.
In case, of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
Identity and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.
Order Date :- 6.10.2023 Abhishek