Rakesh Bhartiya Vs State of U.P.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:29552

Court No. - 67

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7366 of 2025

Applicant :- Rakesh Bhartiya Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Manish Dubey,Saumitra Dwivedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

¶6

Sri Chandra Shekhar Mishra, Advocate has filed his vakalatnama on behalf of the informant. The same is taken on record.

¶7

Supplementary affidavit filed by counsel for the applicant is taken on record.

¶8

Heard counsel for the applicant, counsel for the informant, Sri V.P. Tripathi, learned A.G.A. for the State-opposite party and perused the record.

¶9

The instant bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. has been filed with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.134 of 2023 under Section 395 I.P.C., Police StationKaudhiyara, District- Prayagraj, during the pendency of the trial.

¶10

Counsel for the applicant submits that earlier the applicant was granted bail under Sections 147, 149, 307, 403, 120B of I.P.C., Police Station- Kaudhiyara, District- Prayagraj, vide order dated 21.01.2025 passed by this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 36075 of 2024. During the course of investigation, Section 395 I.P.C. was added by the Investigating Officer. The applicant seeks bail in the added section. It is contended that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. No recovery was made from the applicant. The criminal history of the applicant has been explained in para no. 2 of the supplementary affidavit. He further submits that for the reasons stated in the order dated 21.01.2025, the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail in added sections as well.

¶11

Learned A.G.A. and counsel for the informant have opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid facts from the record.

¶12

Having heard counsel for the parties and having perused the

¶13

record this Court prima facie finds that earlier the applicant was granted bail under Sections 147, 149, 307, 403, 120B of I.P.C., Police Station- Kaudhiyara, District- Prayagraj, vide order dated 21.01.2025 passed by this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 36075 of 2024. No recovery was made from the applicant. The applicant has remained confined for more than six months and there is no hope of early conclusion of trial, more so when no reasonable apprehension has been brought to the fore by the State that the applicant, if enlarged on bail, would either tamper with the evidence or delay the trial or intimidate the witness, without commenting on merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶14

Let the applicant- Rakesh Bhartiya , involved in aforesaid case 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 the conditions that he:

¶15

(i) shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court;

¶16

(ii) shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence;

¶17

(iii) shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses.

¶18