It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the first information report has been lodged by Constable Rupchand Saroj on 5th June, 2018 at 2300 hours against five persons including the present applicant alleging therein that the applicant and other coaccused Gaurav Sharma, who were accused in another case, were brought by the two Police Personnels to be produced before the Gangester Court at Mathura by train from Kanpur on 31st May, 2019 and thereafter they along with applicant and co-accused were returning to Kanpur by train from Agra Cantt. Railway Station and when the train reached Kasganj both the Police Personnels fell asleep in the train, both the accused i.e. applicant and Gaurabh succeeded to escape at Farrukhabad railway station. It has further been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that though the applicant along with co-accused ran away from the police custody, but the real fact is that there was planning of the informant and other constables to kill and finish the life of the applicant due to that reason the applicant ran away to save his life and on the next date, he surrendered before the Court below. The applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. It has further been argued that the other co-accused, who have been named in the first information report, have already been enlarged on bail. Learned counsel for the applicant has also pressed the issue of period of detention of the applicant i.e. 6th June, 2018, who has undergone more than eleven months of incarceration. He, therefore, submits that considering the larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh v. State of U.P. and another , reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 no useful purpose would be served in keeping the applicant behind the bars. The applicant has criminal history of 19 cases to their credit except the present one but the same have satisfactorily been explained in paragraph-7 of the affidavit accompanying the present bail application. It is next contended that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses and in case, the
