Allahabad High Court
Mohd. Talib Ansari vs State Of U.P. on 10 March, 2021
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH ?Court No. - 29 Case :- BAIL No. - 1291 of 2021 Applicant :- Mohd. Talib Ansari Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Naveen Kumar Pandey,Neeraj Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Mohd. Faiz Alam Khan,J.
Learned A.G.A. informs that he has procured complete instructions in the matter including the complete case diary and the charge-sheet in this case has already been submitted.
Record would also reveal that despite opportunity provided to the State, the counter affidavit has not been filed.
Heard learned counsel for the accused-applicant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
This bail application has been moved by the accused/applicant- Mohd. Talib Ansari for grant of bail, in Case Crime No. 977 of 2020, under Section 399 and 402 I.P.C, Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Gonda, during trial.
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.
It is further submitted that allegations in the F.I.R. are to the tune that on the fateful day, the applicant and other co-accused persons were arrested while they were hatching a conspiracy to steal idol from a temple and during interrogation co-accused Raj Kumar Gharuk and Ajitesh had confessed that few days before they had stolen an idol from a temple and the same is with co-accused Javed. It has also been stated in the F.I.R. that when co-accused Javed was contacted at his home and was interrogated about the above mentioned idol, he got the idol recovered from his shop. However, both the hands of the idol were cut and it has been informed by co-accused Raj Kumar Gharuk that the same were cut by co-accused Ajitesh Kumar Singh at his flat at Allahabad and a sample of the same was given to the instant applicant- Mohd. Talib Ansari and co-accused Javed and after melting the same, the net content was kept by co-accused Javed and he had also given Rs. 50,000/- to them and kept the idol with him. Highlighting the above factual matrix, it has been vehemently submitted that the court below vide its order dated 02.01.2021 passed in Bail Application No. 1690 of 2020 has granted bail to the co-accused Javed whose role in the alleged crime is much graver than that the role of the applicant, but in utter disrespect to the principle of parity has rejected the bail application of the instant applicant.
It isalso submitted that charge-sheet in the matter has already been submitted and the applicant is in jail in this matter since 12.12.2020 and the applicant is not having any previous criminal antecedents. It is submitted that there is no apprehension that after being released on bail he may flee from the course of law or may otherwise misuse the liberty.
Learned A.G.A., however, opposes the prayer for bail, but could not confront the submissions of learned counsel for the applicant, with regard to the fact that the role of instant applicant is much lesser than that the role of co-accused Javed, who has already been released on bail by subordinate court.
Having regard to the overall facts and circumstances of the case, I find substance in the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant for the purpose of releasing the applicant on bail. The bail application is, thus, allowed.
Let the applicant- Mohd. Talib Ansari involved in the aforesaid case be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:-
(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.
(ii) The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.
(iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.
Order Date :- 10.3.2021 Praveen