Allahabad High Court
Ranjit Singh @ Major vs State Of U.P. on 30 April, 2021
Author: Alok Mathur
Bench: Alok Mathur
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH ?Court No. - 26 Case :- BAIL No. - 4475 of 2021 Applicant :- Ranjit Singh @ Major Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Divaker Singh,Aman Kumar Shrivastav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the accused-applicant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
2. The instant bail application has been moved by the accused/applicant- Ranjit Singh @ Major for grant of bail, in Case Crime No. 319 of 2020, under Section 394 I.P.C., Police Station- Kandhai, District- Pratapgarh, during trial.
3. Learned counsel for the accused-applicant while pressing the bail application submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case and he has not committed any offence as claimed by the prosecution.
4. It is further submitted that in the F.I.R. it has been specifically mentioned that the applicant and other co-accused persons namely Shubham were identified in the C.C.T.V. footage, however, during the course of investigation no such C.C.T.V. footage was provided to the investigating officer and, therefore, the claim of the informant that the applicant and other co-accused persons were identified by perusing the C.C.T.V. footage is patently false.
5. It is further submitted that the recovery of Rs.15,695/- and of mobile phone and other registers alleged to have been recovered from the applicant at the time of his alleged arrest could not be believed for want of independent public witnesses and more so the recovery of the registers shown from the applicant throws a cloud of suspicion over the story of the prosecution as in the First Information Report and in the statement of the informant, it has nowhere mentioned that apart from the other materials, the registers of the shop were also looted and to cover this lacunae the statement of one witness namely Raj Bahadur was recorded after the alleged arrest of the applicant to the effect that along with other material and money, the registers were also looted in the alleged incident. Therefore, the story of the prosecution is not believable.
6. It is also submitted that charge-sheet in the matter has already been submitted and the applicant is in jail in this matter since 16.2.2021 and there is no apprehension that after being released on bail he may flee from the course of law or may otherwise misuse the liberty. It has been further submitted that co-accused Umaid Ali has already been enlarged on bail by the coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 22.3.2021 passed in Bail Application No. 9639 of 2020.
7. Learned A.G.A., however, opposes the prayer for bail of the applicant, but could not controvert the other factual submissions made by the learned counsel for the accused-applicant.
8. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, perusing the record and also considering the nature of allegations, arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties as well as the fact that co-accused of the case has already been granted bail and, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a fit case for granting bail.
9. Let applicant- Ranjit Singh @ Major be released on bail in Case Crime No. 319 of 2020, under Section 394 I.P.C., Police Station- Kandhai, District- Pratapgarh on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Magistrate/Court concerned, subject to following conditions :-
(i) 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.
(ii) The applicant 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 him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails 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.
(iv) 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.
10. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the Court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail and proceed against the applicant in accordance with law.
11. The application stands disposed of.
12. The party shall file computer generated copy of order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by him alongwith a self attested identity proof of the said person (preferably Adhar Card) mentioning the mobile number to which the said Adhar Card is linked before the concerned Court/Authority/Official.
13. The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of the 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 :- 30.4.2021 Vikas/-