Mehtaab Alias Sheru vs State Of Uttarakhand

Alok Kumar Verma, J

Present Application has been filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for grant of regular bail in connection with the Case Crime No.1149 of 2022, registered at police station Bhagwanpur, District Haridwar. Applicant is in judicial custody under Sections 396, 412 & Section 120 B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

As per prosecution’s case, on 09.12.2022, when informant-Mayank Kumar was going by e-rickshaw along with Prabhakar Behra after withdrawing money from SBI Branch, Roorkee, some unknown persons stabbed him and Prabhakar Behra and looted his money. Prabhakar Behra died during the investigation. On 14.01.2023, on the pointing out of the applicant, the looted amount of Rs.3,00,000/- (Rupees three lakh) and a knife were recovered from his house. Charge-sheet has been filed.

Mr. Pranav Singh, Advocate, contended that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present matter. The name of applicant has come to light in the confessional statement of Krishna Pal alias Krishan Pal and Rohit Kashyap. Test Identification Parade has not been conducted. The said alleged recovery was planted. As per story of the prosecution, Rs.3,00,000/- and the knife were recovered after 36 days of the incident. Both Krishna Pal alias Krishan Pal and Rohit Kashyap have been granted bail by this Court. Applicant has not been convicted by any Court. He is a permanent resident of District Haridwar. He is in custody since 14.01.2023, and charge sheet has already been filed, therefore, there is no chance of tampering with the evidence. Despite availing sufficient opportunity to file the report of the Forensic Science Laboratory, the same has not been filed by the State.

On the other hand, Mr. V.S. Rathore, A.G.A. has opposed the Bail Application.

Bail is the rule and committal to jail is an exception. Refusal of bail is a restriction on the personal liberty of the individual, guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The object of keeping the accused person in detention during the trial is not punishment. The main purpose is manifestly to secure the attendance of the accused.

Having considered the submission of learned counsel for both the parties and in the facts and circumstances of the case, there is no reason to keep the applicant behind the bars for an indefinite period, therefore, without expressing any opinion as to the merit of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant deserves bail at this stage.

The Bail Application is allowed.

Let the applicant-Mehtaab alias Sheru be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions :-

i) Applicant shall attend the trial court regularly and he will not seek any unnecessary adjournment;

ii) Applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of this case.

It is clarified that if the applicant misuses or violates any of the conditions, imposed upon him, prosecution will be free to move the court for cancellation of bail.