Amarpal Vs State of U.P. — Allahabad HC (2023) — LawSathi Research

Amarpal Vs State of U.P. — Allahabad HC (2023) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Applicant Amarpal to be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to conditions (no tampering with prosecution evidence or intimidating/pressurizing witnesses; sincere cooperation in trial without adjournments; no criminal activity after release), breach being a ground for cancellation; sureties to be verified before issuance of the release order.

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant Amarpal, arraigned in Case Crime No. 105 of 2023 (PCPNDT Act, 1994 and IPC offences, P.S. Baradari, District Bareilly), is entitled to be released on bail during pendency of trial.

Court's answer

Keeping in view the nature of offence, evidence, complicity of the accused and the fact that the case of the applicant is similar to that of co-accused who have been granted bail, the applicant was held entitled to bail on parity.

Ratio / Principle

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, and in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in Satendra Kumar Antil, the Court held that the applicant had made out a case for bail and allowed the bail application.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail — Parity with co-accused — Granted. The Allahabad High Court allowed the bail application of Amarpal, stated to be staff of the concerned hospital, arraigned in Case Crime No. 105 of 2023 (P.S. Baradari, District Bareilly) under Sections 3(2), 3(3), 4(1)-(4), 5(2), 6(a), 18, 23 and 29 of the Preconception and Prenatal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act, 1994 and Sections 420, 120-B, 34 IPC. Considering the nature of offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, and that identically placed co-accused Jitendra Pal and Islam Khan had already been granted bail by a co-ordinate bench (orders dated 31.03.2023 and 03.04.2023 in Bail Applications Nos. 14295 and 13205 of 2023), and keeping in view the law laid down by the Apex Court in Satendra Kumar Antil v. C.B.I., the Court held, without expressing any opinion on merits, that a case for bail was made out. The applicant, in custody since 07.02.2023, was directed to be released on a personal bond with two sureties, subject to conditions of not tampering with evidence, cooperating in trial and refraining from criminal activity; breach of conditions to be a ground for cancellation of bail.

Court No. - 87

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12649 of 2023

Applicant :- Amarpal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Prateek Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J.

Heard counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. on behalf of State and perused the record.

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No.105 of 2023, under Sections 3 (2), 3 (3), 4 (1, 2, 3, 4) 5 (2), 6 (a), 18, 23, 29 of Preconception and Prenatal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act, 1994 and Sections 420, 120-B, 34 I.P.C., P.S. Baradari, District Bareilly, during pendency of trial.

It is submitted by counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. The applicant is only the staff of concerned hospital. The applicant has no concern with the alleged offence. There is no evidence against the applicant to implicate him in the present case. It has been next argued that identically placed coaccused, Jitendra Pal and Islam Khan have been granted bail by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide orders dated 31.03.2023 and 03.04.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 14295 of 2023 and 13205 of 2023, respectively. He further submits that since the role of the applicant is not distinguishable with the role of co-accused, therefore, the applicant is also entitled to be enlarged on bail on the ground of parity. He is languishing in jail since 07.02.2023. In case, he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.

On the other hand, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts.

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 the fact that the case of the applicant is similar to that of co-accused, who

have been granted bail 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 , passed in 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, Amarpal 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.

The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.

The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

Order Date :- 12.4.2023 Meenu Singh

Digitally signed by :- MEENU SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad