Court No. - 73

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2802 of 2023

Applicant :- Mithun Patel

Opposite Party :- State of U.P.

Counsel for Applicant :- Alok Tripathi

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State.

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Mithun

Patel, with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No.173 of 2018,

under Sections 302 I.P.C, Police Station- Tharwai, District-

Prayagraj/Allahabad, during pendency of trial.

The co-accused, Sunil Yadav, has been enlarged on bail in Criminal Misc.

Bail Application No.5207 of 2019. The prayer for release of the applicant on

bail on the ground of parity has been made. The applicant is languishing in

jail since 08.02.2019.

Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant.

Considering the fact that the identically placed co-accused has already been

released on bail by this Court, without expressing any opinion on the merits of

the case and for the reasons disclosed in the order of co-accused, the Court is

of the view that it is a fit case for bail.

Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the

accused; submissions of the learned counsel for the parties noted above;

finding force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the

applicant; keeping view the uncertainty regarding conclusion of trial; one

sided investigation by police, ignoring the case of accused side; applicant

being under trial having fundamental right to speedy trial; larger mandate of

the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, considering the dictum of Apex

Court in the case of Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another reported in

(2018) 3 SCC 22 and recent judgment dated 11.07.2022 of the Apex Court in

the case of Satendra Kumar Antil vs. C.B.I., passed in S.L.P (Crl.) No. 5191

of 2021 and considering 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above their

capacity by the under trials and without expressing any opinion on the merits

of the case and considering the fact that the identically placed co-accused has

already been released on bail by this Court, without expressing any opinion on

the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that it is a fit case for bail. The

bail application is allowed.

Let the applicant involved in the aforesaid crime 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 with the following conditions that :-

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

(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.

(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 of the Indian Penal Code.

(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. is issued and the

applicants fail to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such

proclamation then the Trial Court shall initiate proceedings against him in

accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

(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. If in the opinion of the Trial

Court absence of the applicant is deliberate or withou