The High Court allowed the criminal bail application of Shubham Varnwal charged under the Arms Act. Considering unexplained FIR delay, lack of independent eyewitnesses, and a false recovery, the court found sufficient grounds for bail.
The applicant was ordered to be released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each.
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. - 92
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 47469 of 2022
Applicant :- Shubham Varnwal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Chandan Singh,Anjani Kumar Singh,Shweta Nishad Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Gajendra Kumar,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A.for the State and perused the record.
As per prosecution story, on the information of 'Mukhbir Khas' when informant was on patrolling duty to maintain peace in the society, one country made pistol 12 bore along with two piece of cartridges in alive position have been recovered from the possession the applicant.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that he has been falsely implicated in the present case. The unexplained delay in lodgement of F.I.R. shows that the same has been lodged as an afterthought. There is no any independent eyewitness to the alleged recovery and recovery has been falsely planted by the police from the possession of the present applicant. False recovery of Rs.7400/- has been shown from the possession of the applicant, which is self money of the applicant. The applicant has criminal history of 21 cases, which he has satisfactorily explained in para 24 of the bail application. Lastly it is contended by the learned counsel for applicant that the applicant shall not abscond and will fully cooperate in the criminal law proceedings. In case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. The applicant is in jail since 27.08.2022.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant but could not dispute the aforesaid fact.
In this matter, it appears that there is unexplained delay in lodging of the FIR; there is no any independent eyewitness to the alleged recovery; applicant has criminal history of twenty one cases, which he has satisfactorily explained in para-24 of the bail application coupled with the fact that applicant is languishing in jail since 27.08.2022; grounds for bail is sufficient.
Hence, considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the nature of offence, evidence, complicity of accused and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and the law laid down by the Apex Court in Satendra Kumar Antil Vs. C.B.I. & Another, S.L.P.(Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.
Let the applicant, Shubham Varnwal, who is involved in Case Crime No. 179 of 2021, under Section 3/25 of Arms Act, Police Station-Khampar , District- Deoria, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.
(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.
(ii) The applicant will not influence any witness.
(iii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.
(iv) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.
Order Date :- 31.10.2022 Ashutosh
Digitally signed by ASHUTOSH SINGH Date: 2022.11.01 10:45:13 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to bail considering unexplained delay in FIR, false recovery, and criminal history.
Whether the sufficient grounds for bail are made out without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Satendra Kumar Antil Vs. C.B.I. & AnotherReferred¶10
Satendra Kumar Antil Vs. C.B.I. & Another, S.L.P.(Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Shubham Varnwal
Gajendra Kumar
Ashutosh Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
