Hon'ble Subhash Chand, J., granted bail to Deepak Kashyap in a theft case involving IPC Sections 457, 380, and 411. The court noted weak evidence of recovery and found it a fit case for bail despite criminal antecedents.
Applicant released on bail in Cr. No. 496 of 2019 on personal bond and two sureties.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 77
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 48274 of 2020
Applicant :- Deepak Kashyap Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Vivek Sharma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Subhash Chand,J.
Heard learned counsel for applicant, learned A.G.A. and perused the record.
This bail application has been preferred by the accusedapplicant- Deepak Kashyap , who is involved in Case Crime No. 496 of 2019, under Sections 457, 380, 411 IPC, P.S.- Bilari, District- Moradabad.
Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the first informant Mahendra Pal has lodged the FIR on 14.10.2019 against unknown persons which was registered as Case Crime No. 496 of 2019, under Sections 457, 380, 411 IPC and the name of the applicant was surfaced in extra judicial confessional statement. There is no independent witnesses of the alleged recovery. The applicant has criminal antecedent of three cases in all three cases he has been enlarged on bail by the court below and applicant has no motive of committing the alleged offence. He is in jail since 22.10.2020. Accordingly applicant may be enlarged on bail.
Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer for bail.
As per FIR version of Case Crime No.496 of 2019, the informant Mahendra Pal lodged the present FIR on 13.10.2019 with the allegations that on the last night some unknown persons had committed theft in a shop after having broken the lock and had stolen one computer, one camera, lamination machine, finger print device etc total cost was about Rs. 45000/-.
The applicant accused was apprehended on 15.10.2019 by the police party and on his confessional statement Rs.500/- in cash and two sacks of paddy were recovered. The alleged recovery of paddy is not shown to be stolen from the alleged shop of the informant. As such the connecting theses alleged recovery with FIR of Case Crime No.496 of 2019 has no concerned. The applicant has been languishing in jail since 22.10.2020.
In view of the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made by learned counsel for both sides and going through the record, without commenting on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail.
Let applicant, Deepak Kashyap , be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:
(i) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity.
(ii) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.
(iii) The applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses.
(iv) The applicant shall regularly appear on the dates fixed by the trial court unless his personal attendance is exempted by the trial court.
In case of default of any of the conditions enumerated above, liberty is given to the trial court to cancel the bail of the applicant without any reference to this Court.
Order Date :- 4.1.2021 A.Kr.
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the accused is eligible for bail under the circumstances.
Whether the alleged recovery connects the applicant to the offence.
Deepak Kashyap
Subhash Chand
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
