This order grants bail to the applicant in a case involving sections 395, 342, 412 IPC. The court held it fit for bail considering overcrowding, lack of incriminating material, and parity with co-accused, subject to conditions.
Release on bail upon personal bond and two sureties; non-tampering with evidence, attending court, no unlawful activities.
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. - 44
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4358 of 2022
Applicant :- Tushar Loteshwar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Vikas Sharma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for State and perused the record.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant seeking enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 484 of 2021, under Sections 395, 342, 412 I.P.C., Police Station Nai Mandi, District Muzaffar Nagar.
Contention is that there is no independent witness to the alleged recovery of Rs.20,500/- which amount otherwise belongs to the applicant. It is further stated that the applicant has no previous criminal history and no incriminating material has otherwise been collected by the Investigating Officer against the applicant. The applicant is stated to be languishing in jail since 08.10.2021. It is further argued that the trial is not likely to be concluded shortly on account of Covid-19 pandemic and that the applicant undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the conduct of trial. Argument is that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail on the ground of parity also with the co-accused persons namely Sushant @ Lambu Sahgal and Rajat Chhabra, who have been granted bail by this Court vide orders dated 28.01.2022 and 02.02.2022.
Learned A.G.A. opposes the bail application.
Courts have taken notice of the overcrowding of jails during the current pandemic situation (Ref.: Suo Motu Writ Petition (C) No. 1/2020, Contagion of COVID 19 Virus in prisons before the Supreme Court of India). These circumstances shall also be factored in while considering bail application on behalf of accused person.
Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, perusal of record, severity of punishment, totality of facts and circumstances, at this stage without expressing any view on the merits of the case, the Court is of the opinion that it is a fit case for bail.
Let the applicant Tushar Loteshwar be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:-
(i) The applicant will not tamper with prosecution evidence.
(ii) The applicant will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.
(iii) The applicant will not indulge in any unlawful activities.
(iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever.
The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.
Accordingly, the instant bail application is allowed.
Order Date :- 15.2.2022 Ashok Kr.
Digitally signed by ASHOK KUMAR Date: 2022.02.16 10:50:49 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to be released on bail considering the facts and circumstances including jail overcrowding.
Whether parity with co-accused granted bail entitles the applicant to release on bail.
Tushar Loteshwar
State of U.P.
Ashwani Kumar Mishra
Ashok Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
