The High Court rejected the bail application of Arjun Diwaker in a theft case involving two recovered mobile phones. The Court held that the applicant's extensive criminal history of 20 cases indicated he was a person of criminal nature, making bail an inappropriate exception.
Bail application rejected.
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. - 79
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 30864 of 2022
Applicant :- Arjun Diwaker Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Atul Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.
1.Heard Sri Atul Kumar Singh, the learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Jai Kishan Chaurasia, the learned Additional Government Advocate and perused the record.
2.Rejoinder affidavit and counter affidavit filed today are taken on record.
3.The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 292 of 2022, under Sections 392, 411, 414 IPC, Police Station Uttar, District Firozabad.
4.The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of a first information report lodged on 02.05.2022 at 07:20 hours and the police claimed to have intercepted a motorcycle on 03.05.2022 on the basis of an information received from a Mukhbir. It is alleged that the person sitting on the pillion seat of the motorcycle ran away and the person driving the motorcycle was the applicant and two mobile phones were recovered from his possession.
5.The recovery memo states that the mobile phone was identified by its owner.
6.In the affidavit filed in support of the bail application, the applicant's criminal history of 20 cases has been disclosed and it has been claimed that the applicant has been granted bail in all the cases.
7.The State has filed a counter affidavit opposing the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant and it has been stated in the counter affidavit that the applicant's criminal history of 20 cases indicates that he is a man of criminal nature. The robbed mobile phone has been recovered from the applicant and after investigation, a charge sheet has already been submitted against the applicant and the Trial Court has taken cognizance of the case and the trial is in progress.
6.I have considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, what prima facie appears at this stage is that two mobile phones have been recovered from the applicant and one of the phones has been identified by its owner.
7.The affidavit filed on behalf of the applicant discloses his involvement in 20 cases ranging between the years 2018 to 2022 and involving allegation of commission of offences of various nature. The allegation levelled in the counter affidavit that the applicant is a person of criminal nature finds support by the fact that there is long criminal history of 20 cases.
8.In Dataram Singh v. State of U.P., (2018) 3 SCC 22, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that: -
"A fundamental postulate of criminal jurisprudence is the presumption of innocence, meaning thereby that a person is believed to be innocent until found guilty. However, there are instances in our criminal law where a reverse onus has been placed on an accused with regard to some specific offences but that is another matter and does not detract from the fundamental postulate in respect of other offences. Yet another important facet of our criminal jurisprudence is that the grant of bail is the general rule and putting a person in jail or in a prison or in a correction home (whichever expression one may wish to use) is an exception. Unfortunately, some of these basic principles appear to have been lost sight of with the result that more and more persons are being incarcerated and for longer periods. This does not do any good to our criminal jurisprudence or to our society.
2. There is no doubt that the grant or denial of bail is entirely the discretion of the judge considering a case but even so, the exercise of judicial discretion has been circumscribed by a large number of decisions rendered by this Court and by every High Court in the country. Yet, occasionally there is a necessity to introspect whether denying bail to an accused person is the right thing to do on the facts and in the circumstances of a case.
(Emphasis supplied)
Order Date :- 29.11.2022 Ashish Pd.
Digitally signed by ASHISH PRASAD Date: 2022.12.01 11:39:32 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
3 issues framed by the court
Whether bail can be granted to an applicant with an extensive criminal history involving 20 cases and an identified implicating mobile phone.
Whether the extensive criminal history warrants denial of bail despite the general rule granting bail.
Whether the recovery of identified mobile phones supported the refusal of bail.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Dataram Singh v. State of U.P.Distinguished¶14
Dataram Singh v. State of U.P., (2018) 3 SCC 22 · Who else cites this
Arjun Diwaker
State of U.P.
Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi, J.
Ashish Prasad
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
