Allowed

Mukesh Tiwari v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Hom Civil Sectt. Lko

Allahabad HC20 Feb 2024/1779/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under Sections 394, 411, and 413 IPC, the High Court held that a case of bail was made out due to allegations of false implication by local police stemming from enmity. The Court noted no evidence existed against the applicant and directed the Superintendents of Police to supervise the pending investigation personally.

What did the court decide?

Release of applicant on bail with a personal bond and two sureties, subject to conditions not to tamper with witnesses and cooperate in trial.

Mukesh Tiwari Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt… — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:15083

¶2

Court No. - 15

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1779 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Mukesh Tiwari Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Hom Civil Sectt. Lko

¶5

Counsel for Applicant :- Ashish Kumar Singh,Manish Vaish Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶6

Hon'ble Mohd. Faiz Alam Khan,J.

¶7

Learned AGA informs that he has procured complete instructions in the matter including upto date case diary and investigation in this case is still pending.

¶8

Heard Shri Manish Vaish, learned counsel for the accused/applicant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶9

This bail application has been moved by the accused/applicant- Mukesh Tiwari for grant of bail, in Case Crime No. 04/2024, under Sections 394, 411 413 IPC, Police Station Kotwali Dehat, District Gonda, during trial.

¶10

Learned counsel for the accused-applicant while pressing the bail application submits that it is a case of false implication. The FIR of this case has been lodged by one Gangesh Singh from whose factory the iron rod (sariya) was shown to have been loaded in Truck No. U.P. 78 GT 3632 alleging therein that iron rod (sariya) used in construction of the building of the value of Rs. 17,00,000/- was loaded in the above mentioned truck. The driver of which was one Vinod and the said truck had departed on 28th December, 2023, however, on 31.12.2023 an information is received by the truck owner, namely, Ankit Gunani that the said truck is standing in an abundant condition at Singh Dharm Kanta, Faizabad Road, Darzi Kunwan, Gonda and the truck owner and other persons had immediately informed the police on dial 112 and a consequence of which one accused person was arrested, who was driving the truck and he informed that he has unloaded the Sariya/ iron rod loaded in the truck in the premises of K.D. Public School.

¶11

Highlighting above, it is vehemently submitted that in the FIR itself it is alleged that though the information of the recovery of the truck has been given to the concerned police

¶12

Station on 31.12.2023 the First Information Report is not being lodged and no proceedings are being initiated.

¶13

It is vehemently submitted that in the FIR which has been lodged by the factory owner on 2.1.2024 it has been categorically admitted that the truck has been recovered on 31.12.2023, however, on the basis of prior enmity with the applicant the local police has shown recovery of this truck on 3.1.2024 and the applicant is also shown to be accompanying co-accused Rizwan in that truck and the iron rod/ sariya is also shown to have been recovered from a school on the pointing of the applicant and co-accused Rizwan.

¶14

It is vehemently submitted that whole case has been cooked up by the local police on the basis of enmity with the applicant as the applicant has earlier made complaint against the local police with regard to the misdeed committed by them.

¶15

It is vehemently submitted that during the course of investigation the statement of informant namely, Gangesh Singh has been recorded who has categorically stated to have received the information of recovery of truck by the truck owner Ankit Gunani on 31.12.2023 and Ankit Guanani in his statement recorded under Section161 Cr.P.C. has stated that he got an information that his driver has been assaulted by some unknown persons and one Rizwan and he got this information on 30.12.2023 and thereafter he instructed his other drivers to trace the said truck and it was on 31.12.2023 his driver Harshyam son of Ram Singh had informed that the said truck, namely, U.P. 78 GT 3632 has been found standing in an abundant condition at Singh Dharm Kanta, Faizabad Road, Darzi Kuwan, Gonda and after that information was given Dial No. 112.

¶16

It is vehemently submitted that the above facts which have been investigated by the Investigating Officer would clearly demonstrate that a false case has been cooked up so far as the applicant is concerned, probably on account of his previous criminal history and his enmity with the local police.

¶17

It is also submitted that the applicant is in jail in this case since 4.1.2024. He is ready to cooperate in the investigation and there is no apprehension that the accused-applicant after release on bail, may flee from the process of law or may otherwise misuse the liberty. The criminal history of the applicant comprising of 11 cases has been explained in paragraph no. 34 of the bail application. However, the criminal history in this case is wholly insignificant and there is absolutely no evidence against the applicant.

¶18

Learned A.G.A. on the other hand submits that the applicant has been arrested by the police on 3.1.2024 along with coaccused Rizwan and the iron rods allegedly looted by assaulting the driver has also been recovered and therefore the applicant is not entitled to be released on bail.

¶19

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record, it is reflected and appears to be an admitted fact to the parties that a First Information Report of this case has been lodged by owner of Sariya/ Iron Rod on 2.1.2024 wherein it is categorically stated that on 31.12.2023 the owner of the iron rods/ sariya has got information from the owner of the truck that the said truck bearing registration No. U.P. 78 GT 3632 is standing in an abundant condition at Singh Dharm Kanta, Faizabad Road, Darzi Kuwan, Gonda and one suspect has also been arrested by the police and despite efforts made by the owner of the truck the police is not registering the FIR and no proceeding has been initiated. This information is admittedly given on 2.1.2024. The fact of the recovery of the truck on 31.12.2023 has been further fortified by the statement of owner of the ruck Ankit Gunani who has categorically stated in his statement that he has instructed other drivers to trace the above mentioned truck and in consequence of that direction it was on 31.12.2023 his driver on another truck, namely, U.P. 78 JN 9639, namely, Harshyam son of Ram Singh had informed him that the aforementioned truck U.P. 78 GT 3632 has been found standing in an abundant condition at Singh Dharm Kanta, Faizabad Road, Darzi Kunwan, Gonda and it was on this information the owner of truck, namely, Ankit Gunani had claimed to have informed dial 112. Significantly the driver of the truck, namely, Vinod in his statement has stated that an incident occurred in the intervening night 29/30 December, 2023 that he was assaulted by one Rizwan and his other associates and they have also looted the truck along with the loaded sariya. Thus the driver of the truck has also not taken the name of the instant applicant. Perusal of the case diary which has been submitted by the concerned Police Station would reveal that still no identification of the applicant has been made by the above mentioned truck driver- Vinod.

¶20

Having considered all the facts and circumstances of the case and exercising judicial restrain this Court is not commenting on the manner the investigation of this case has been conducted. Suffice is to say that the investigation of this case should have been done in a more diligent manner.

¶21

Thus, for the reasons mentioned herein before a case of bail is made out in favour of the applicant and while finding the case of bail in favour of the applicant this Court is conscious of

¶22

the criminal history of the applicant, however, the law is well settled in this regard only on account of criminal history of an accused person who is carrying innocence his plea of bail may not be negated and the Court is bound to look into the facts and circumstances of the case and also the allegations as well as the material which has been collected in support of the same.

¶23

In result the plea of bail of the applicant is allowed .

¶24

Let the applicant- Mukesh Tiwari involved in the aforesaid case be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:-

¶25

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

¶26

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

¶27

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

¶28

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

¶29

Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

¶30

Observations made herein-above are only for the purpose of disposal of bail application and the same shall not have any bearing on the trial of the case.

¶31

Before parting it appears necessary in the interest of justice to direct the Superintendent of Police Gonda to supervise the investigation of this case personally, if the same is still pending and take appropriate action, if any police personnel is found guilty of any misconduct.

¶32

A copy of this order e sent to SSP/SP Gonda for compliance.

¶33

Order Date :- 20.2.2024 Muk

¶34

Digitally signed by :- MOHD UMAR KHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Mukesh Tiwari v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Hom Civil Sectt. Lko

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mukesh Tiwari v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Hom Civil Sectt. Lko

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Abhishek Saroj Vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Civil Secrt. Lko.

Baijnath Tiwari Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home Deptt. Lko

Madan Mohan Yadav @ Madan Mohan @ Dablu and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Indrajeet Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Jai Prakash Vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Civil Secrt. Lko.

Mayank Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.