Allahabad High Court
Mohd.Khaleel @ Badshah vs State Of U.P. on 1 May, 2015
Bench: Ramesh Sinha
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 17
Case :- BAIL No. - 1501 of 2015
Applicant :- Mohd.Khaleel @ Badshah
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Ramesh Kumar Misra,Jai Prakash Awasthi
Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt.Advocate
Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J.
Heard Sri Ramesh Kumar Misra, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Alok Mohan Upadhyay, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State and perused the record.
It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is the husband of the deceased. The marriage between them was solemnized two years ago. He submits that as per the dying declaration of the deceased, no allegation has been levelled against the applicant as the same has been levelled against other family members of the applicant, i.e., Nand, Nandoi and mother-in-law of the deceased against whom charge-sheet has been submitted under Section 304-B I.P.C. also along with Section 498-A/34 I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act and so far as applicant is concerned, charge-sheet has been submitted under Section 498-A/34 I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act. The applicant has no other reported criminal antecedent. The applicant is in jail since 9.3.2014.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid fact as argued by learned counsel for the applicant.
Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tempering of the witnesses and prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case.
Let the applicant Mohammad Khaleel @ Badshah involved in Case Crime No. 121 of 2014 under Sections 498-A/34 I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act, police station Hazratganj, District Lucknow be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions.
(i) 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.
(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails 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.
(iv) 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 without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.
The case of the applicant is distinguishable from co-accused persons, who are named in the dying declaration of the deceased.
Order Date :- 1.5.2015
shiraz
