Subham vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. on 23 July, 2025

Allahabad High Court

Subham vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. on 23 July, 2025

Author: Rajesh Singh Chauhan

Bench: Rajesh Singh Chauhan

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:42308
 
Court No. - 11
 
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8689 of 2024
 
Applicant :- Subham
 
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Alok Kumar Singh,Pawan Kumar Singh
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.
 

1. Heard Shri Gyan Sagar Gupta, Advocate holding brief of Shri Pawan Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Dr. Surendra Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State.

2. Learned counsel for the applicant has filed supplementary affidavit enclosing therewith the complete copy of order sheet and the copies of bail orders granted to the co-accused, same is taken on record.

3. As per learned counsel for the applicant, the present applicant is in jail since 17.09.2019 in Case Crime No.416 of 2019 under Sections 452, 354, 511, 302, 307, 506, 34 I.P.C. Police Station- Maigalganj, District- Lakhimpur Kheri. He has been falsely implicated in this case as he has not committed any offence as alleged in the prosecution story.

4. Attention has been drawn towards the impugned FIR, wherein the allegation of firing has been attributed against four named accused persons including the present applicant. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that main allegation of firing has been levelled against the present applicant and the weapon used to execute the offence in question i.e. country made pistol/katta of .315 has been recovered from the pointing out of the applicant. The aforesaid allegation and recovery is false and misconceived, but the aforesaid fact may be ascertained during the course of trial. The present applicant is having no prior criminal history and he is law abiding citizen. The entire family of the present applicant has been implicated by the informant having ulterior motive and exterior design in his mind. Further, till date out of 26 prosecution witnesses, only 05 prosecution witnesses have been examined and cross examined, therefore, keeping in a view the pace of trial, there is no likelihood to conclude the trial in near future and those 05 witnesses are fact and relevant witnesses, therefore, if present applicant is released on bail, he may not be able to influence any witness or tamper any evidence. In the light of above, considering the period of incarceration in jail of the present applicant i.e. about five years and eleven months and the fact that the present applicant is having no prior criminal history of any kind whatsoever and all fact/relevant witnesses have been examined, he may be enlarged on bail.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant has referred the dictum of the Apex Court in re; Gokarakonda Naga Saibaba v. State of Maharashtra, (2018) 12 SCC 505, wherein it has been held that if all fact/ material witnesses have been examined, the bail application of the accused may be considered. Besides, he has relied upon the judgments of the Apex Court in re; Union of India vs. K.A. Najeeb reported in AIR 2021 Supreme Court 712 and Paras Ram Vishnoi vs. The Director, Central Bureau of Investigation passed in Criminal Appeal No. 693 of 2021 (Arising out of SLP (Crl) No.3610 of 2020), wherein the Apex Court has held that if there is no possibility to conclude the trial in near future and the accused applicant is in jail for a substantial period then the period of incarceration may be considered as a fresh ground. Learned counsel has submitted that in the present case, all fact/ relevant witnesses have been examined, therefore, the present applicant may be enlarged on bail. He has further submitted that the present applicant undertakes that he shall co-operate in the trial proceedings and shall not misuse the liberty of bail, if so granted by this Court. Further, the applicant shall abide by all terms and conditions of the bail order.

6. Learned AGA has opposed the aforesaid bail application but could not dispute the aforesaid facts.

7. Without entering into merits of the issue; considering the arguments of learned counsel for the parties; present applicant is having no criminal history of any kind whatsoever, out of 26 prosecution witnesses, only 05 prosecution witnesses have been examined and cross examined, all fact/relevant witnesses have been examined, therefore, keeping in a view the pace of trial, there is no likelihood to conclude the trial in near future, considering the dictum of the Apex Court in re; Gokarakonda Naga Saibaba (supra), K.A. Najeeb (supra) and Paras Ram Vishnoi (supra), considering the period of incarceration of the present applicant i.e. five years eleven months, considering the undertaking that applicant shall co-operate in the trial proceedings, shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall abide by all terms and conditions of the bail order, I find it appropriate to release the applicant on bail.

8. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

9. Let applicant- (Subham) be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number 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:-

(i) The applicant shall appear before the Investigating Officer to cooperate in the investigation and shall further remain present to cooperate in the investigation as and when the Investigating Team calls him to appear and if the charge-sheet is filed against him he shall cooperate in the trial proceedings properly and shall file an undertaking to the effect that they 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 IPC/269 of the B.N.S., 2023.

(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./84 of B.N.S.S., 2023 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 IPC/208 of the B.N.S., 2023.

(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./351 of B.N.S.S., 2023. 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. The present applicants shall not leave the country without prior permission of the Court.

10. Before parting with, learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial invoking the provisions of Section 309 Cr.P.C./346 B.N.S.S. without giving any unnecessary adjournment to any of the parties, fixing short date, if possible, on day to day basis and if any of the parties does not cooperate in the trial court proceedings properly, any appropriate coercive steps may be taken by the trial court strictly in accordance with law.

Order Date :- 23.7.2025/Reena

(Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.)