Arjun Jatav Vs State of U.P.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 28946 of 2025

Arjun Jatav

	Versus	.....Applicant(s)
State of U.P.		.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	:	Brij Bhushan Upadhyay
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	:	G.A.

¶5

Court No. - 70

¶6

HON'BLE SANTOSH RAI, J.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant; learned counsel for the informant and learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record.

¶8

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant Arjun Jatav with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No.0293 of 2025, under Sections 308(5) and 352 B.N.S., Police Station Tajganj, District Agra, during pendency of trial.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant has not committed any offence as alleged in the F.I.R. He has been falsely implicated in this case due to ulterior motive. There is delay in lodging the F.I.R. The incident took place on 12.04.2025 whereas F.I.R. has been lodged on 02.05.2025. He further submitted that the applicant is not real beneficiary and he has not received any amount from the informant. Main role has been assigned in the F.I.R. to Jai Bhagwan. The applicant has criminal history of seven cases in which he has already been enlarged on bail, this fact has been mentioned in para-13 of the bail application and the applicant is languishing in jail since 04.05.2025. Lastly it is submitted that co-accused Amit Dixit Urf Monu Dixit has been granted bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 16.09.0225 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.31721 of 2025. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶10

Per contra learned A.G.A.and learned counsel for the informant have opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant by contending that accused Jai

¶11

BAIL No. 28946 of 2025

¶12

2

¶13

Bhagwan was seen in C.C.T.V. footage. The informant has given Rs.10,000/- to the accused Jai Bhagwan. He is habitual offender. They further submitted that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, he does not deserve any indulgence. In case the applicant is released on bail he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail.

¶14

Having considered the submissions of the parties noted above, finding force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant; period of detention in jail, keeping in view uncertainty regarding conclusion of trial; larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, bail application is allowed.

¶15

Considering the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Manish Sisodia Vs. Directorate of Enforcement, 2024 LawSuit (SC) 677, considering 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above their capacity by under trials and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, let the applicant involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions that :-

¶16

(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.

¶17

(ii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in Court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶18

(iii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A I.P.C./269 B.N.S.

¶19

(iv) In case the applicant misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C./84 B.N.S.S. is issued and the applicants fail to appear before the Court on the date fixed in

¶20

BAIL No. 28946 of 2025

¶21

3

¶22

such proclamation then the Trial Court shall initiate proceedings against him in accordance with law under Section 174-A I.P.C./209. B.N.S.

¶23

(v) The applicant shall remain present in person before the Trial Court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C./351 B.N.S.S. If in the opinion of the Trial Court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶24