Manish Kumar Rai vs State of U.P.

Vinod Prasad, J.—Learned Counsel for the applicants has filed a supplementary-affidavit ; the same is taken on record.

Heard learned Counsel for the applicants and the learned A.G.A.

In this case learned A.G.A. has not received instructions. The notice of this bail application was given on 3.8.2006. This bail application is being considered by this Court today on 21.9.2006. It is more than 40 days. The A.G.A. has not received the instructions. It seems that the Investigating Officers in this State are not interested in sending instructions. It seems to me that the Investigating Officers are facilitating the release of accused on bail because they do not send instructions in time and delays it for months. This situation is really grave and it must be remedied immediately. This Court has been passing orders for getting instructions within a period of ten days as is provided in the Rules of this Court.

The applicants cannot be incarcerated into jail because the A.G.A. has not received instruction on the bail application.

Coming to the merits of this case the applicant seeks bail in Crime No. 564 of 2006 u/s 3(1) U.P. Gangaster''s Act of P.S. Kopaganj district Mau.

It is submitted by the counsel for the applicant that the applicants have been implicated falsely in the present case on the basis of a single incident shown in the Gang chart. The said case was a case of personal enemity and the applicants have been granted bail by this Court as well as by Session''s Judge in the aforesaid case. Through the supplementary-affidavits the applicants have filed the bail granting order of Prashant Rai and Akhilesh Rai, applicants, in the aforesaid Crime No. 497 of 2006 under Sections 147/148/149/307, I.P.C. and 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act vide bail Application No. 10919 of 2006 by Hon''ble R. N. Misra, J. Through another supplementary-affidavit the counsel for the applicants has filed bail granting order of Indu Shekhar Rai, applicant, by the Session''s Judge on 8.9.2006. While granting bail to Indu Shekhar Rai, applicant, the Session''s Judge has observed that the applicant has a cross version also which is pending before revisional court to get it registered and the case of the Indu Shekhar Rai is identical to other co- accused Manish Rai and Anil Rai. It was also observed that informant had not received any injury though he was the main target. The weapon wielded by the two accused Manish Rai and Anil Rai has also not been mentioned. But for a single grievous injury sustained by the injured Pankaj which has been attributed to co-accused Manoj rest all the injured from the prosecution side sustained simple injuries which were not dangerous to life. In the F.I.R. only Manoj Rai has been attributed the main role of causing grievous injury to injured Pankaj. Thus, it is contended that there is no evidence that there was a ''Gang'' or that the applicants are members of a ''Gang''. He submitted that on the facts alleged neither there was a ''Gang'' nor the Gangster''s Act is applicable in the present case. He also contended that the applicants are not a previous convict and but for the aforesaid case there is no other case against the applicants. He also contended that the applicants will not abscond nor tamper with prosecution witnesses and they are ready to furnish adequate security for their release. He also submitted that the applicants are in jail since May, 2006.

Learned A.G.A., per contra, submitted that the applicants have been booked under the Gangster''s Act on the basis of the single case mentioned in the Gang chart and that the case u/s 307 was the outcome of political rivalry and therefore the applicants do not deserve to be released on bail.

I have considered the submissions made by both the sides. In this case the applicants are anointed as an accused under the Gangster''s Act only on the basis of a single case in which they have been granted bail. The facts of the raw material case do not indicate that the said case was a handiwork of a ''Gang'' or that any ''Gang'' as such exist. There is no other case pending against the applicants and they have not been convicted in any case uptill now. They have also not caused any grievous injury to any of the injured and in fact they have a cross version also. The applicants are also in jail since May, 2006, nearly about two and half months. In this case the Investigating Officer had not sent the instructions till date even though the notice for the bail application was given to the Government advocate as far back as on 3.8.2006. When the case was taken up last week it was informed by the learned A.G.A. that he had not received instructions on the bail application and hence the consideration of the application was deferred to this day. This bail application was filed in the registry of this Court on 13.9.2006 and after a gap of eight days still the A.G.A. does not have the instructions from the concerned police station from the Investigating Officer. In this view of the matter this Court is left with no other option but to grant bail to the applicant accused on the following conditions:

He will report at concerned Police Station on every Sunday at the time fixed by the Incharge of Police Station concerned.

He will not tamper with the evidence.

He will not leave the district without the permission of the C.J.M., Mau.

He will cooperate in the trial.

Let the applicants, namely, Manish Kumar Rai, Indu Shekhar Rai and Akhilesh Rai be released on bail in Case Crime No. 564 of 2006, u/s 3(1), U.P. Gangster Act, P.S. Kopaganj, district Mau on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Court concerned.

Let a copy of this order be sent to D.G.P., U.P., Lucknow, to issue a direction to the concerned police officials to send the instructions on bail applications filed in this Court within a period of ten days positively as is contemplated under the Rules of the Court. The crime prevention, detection and law and order is paramount duty of the police department than their any other duties.