The Allahabad HC led by Justice Aniruddha Singh allowed an application that had been filed by the applicant for a grant of bail. The applicant had been incarcerated against an FIR that stated that some unknown persons had stolen some 24 batteries. The police later arrested seven other people and recovered the batteries and a sum of rupees 50,000 from them.
The applicant was represented by Krishna Pratap Singh and Vivek Chandra argued that co-accused of the applicant had already been granted bail by a co-ordinate Bench of the Court, and since the role of the co-accused was similar to that of the applicant, the applicant was thus also entitled to bail. He also claimed that the applicant was innocent and had been wrongly implicated in the present case. The applicant was not even named in the FIR. The name only surfaced as afterthought. The case also has no chance of being decided in the near future since the trial court is overburdened with work. The applicant was languishing in jail for more than a year, the date of incarceration being 17/08/2018 and yet there were no legal evidences or independent witnesses. The respondent conceded that the co-accused was granted bail on similar circumstances. They however prayed for a bail to not be granted but were not able to dispute the facts stated by the counsel of the applicant.
The Court after considering all the facts and arguments submitted to it held that the facts of the case, statement submitted by both the parties and the period of incarceration allowed the applicant to be granted bail and hence allowed the application. The Court pronounced that upon reviewing everything, bail would be granted to the applicant on furnishing a personal bond and two other sureties in likeness that pleases the Court.
Nanhe v. State of UP, Bail no. 11370 of 2019.