Allahabad High Court
Balu vs State Of U.P. on 22 September, 2016
Bench: Naheed Ara Moonis
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 47
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 32169 of 2016
Applicant :- Balu
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Sushil Kumar Pandey
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Naheed Ara Moonis,J.
Applicant- Balu seeks bail in Case Crime No. 399 of 2016, under Sections 302, 323, 504 IPC, Police Station Meerapur, District Muzaffar Nagar.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record.
According to the prosecution case the nephew of the complainant Monu was called by the applicant's son Guddu for consuming liquor, the brother of complainant restrained him not to go to the house of the applicant's son Guddu at which all accused persons named in the F.I.R. came at the roof of the complainant and started hurling abusive language and stated that they have not given any wine to Monu and thereafter an altercation took place, the applicant and his wife Bina caught hold the complainant's brother and co-accused Guddu, who is the son of the applicant given a blow of sword on his right arm. Thereafter the complainant had taken the injured brother to the police station from where for examining the injuries taken him to Government Hospital Janshat and from there he was referred to the District Hospital, Muzzaffar Nagar and on the way of District Hospital he succumbed to the injuries. The F.I.R. was lodged on 28.6.2016 at 7.50 P.M. in respect of the aforesaid incident which occurred at 9.00 P.M. on 27.6.2016.
The submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is that the prosecution has concealed the genuineness of the occurrence as the deceased Raj Kumar, the brother of the complainant Munna had tried to outrage the modesty of the applicant's wife and when he saw the applicant and other person arrived there the complainant's brother escaped from the spot extending threat of dire the consequence and later at about 9.00 P.M. the deceased alongwith complainant armed with lathi, Munna armed with sword and two other persons, namely, Joni and Moonu with danda came at the house of the applicant with intention to kill them when they started scuffling with Munna who was having sword in his hand tried to cause injuries to Kausinder but it hit to the deceased on his hand and as such the applicant has not caused any injuries as alleged in the F.I.R. Even if the prosecution case is taken to be true, in the present case, only role of catching hold has been assigned to the applicant alongwith his wife and specific role of causing injury has been attributed to the applicant's son Guddu, who is alleged to have caused injuries by sword to the deceased. The applicant has also tried to lodge the F.I.R. about the incident which took place with his wife but no F.I.R. was lodged and had to move an application under section 156(3) Cr.P.C. before the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate. The applicant is languishing in jail since 29.6.2016 and has no criminal history to his credit, hence deserves to be released on bail. In case the applicant is released on bail he will not misuse the liberty of bail.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail and contended that the applicant and other accused persons have participated actively in the commission of murder and the role assigned to the applicant cannot be deciphered at this stage. In case the applicant is allowed to be released on bail, he will tamper with the prosecution evidence and shall flee away from the judicial process.
Considering the nature of accusation, but without expressing any opinion on the merits, let the applicant Balu involved in 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 :-
1. The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.
2. He will cooperate in the trial bonafidely without seeking adjournments.
3. He shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court
Order Date :- 22.9.2016
RU
