Allahabad High Court
Wali Mohammad And Another vs State Of U.P. on 3 August, 2021
Bench: Sanjay Kumar Pachori
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 68
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 25905 of 2021
Applicant :- Wali Mohammad And Another
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Subhash Chandra Pandey
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.
Heard Sri Subhash Chandra Pandey, learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. and perused the record of the case.
An exemption application has been filed on behalf of the applicant along with present application for exempting the filing of certified copy of the F.I.R. as it could not be made available to the applicant due to COVID-19. \The exemption application is allowed.
The filing of certified copy of the F.I.R. is hereby exempted.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicants seeking enlargement on bail during the trial in Case Crime No. 100 of 2021, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 452, 323, 324, 353, 307, 504, 506, 188, 269, 270 IPC and Section 3 Epidemic Act, and Section 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act, P.S. Shahzadnagar, District Rampur, during pendency of trial.
It has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in this case due to ulterior motive; First Information Report has been lodged against 26 named persons as well as against 56 to 60 unknown persons; there is delay of 24 hours in lodging the said First Information without any explanation for such delay; no specific role has been assigned to any of the applicants-accused; the applicant no. 1 is 70 years old; from the side of the applicants, 9 persons have received simple and grievous injuries and the injuries suffered by the injured are simple in nature as per medical report. It is further submitted that there is no criminal antecedent to their credit. It is also submitted that co -accused, Shakib, son of Jalil and Shakib, son Talib, having similar roles have already been enlarged on by this Court vide order dated 30.07.2021 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 24299 of 2021. It is lastly submitted that there is also no possibility of the applicants either fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses. The applicants, who are languishing in jail since 15.05.2021, undertake that they will not misuse the liberty, if granted. It has also been pointed out that in the wake of heavy pendency of cases in the Court, there is no likelihood of any early conclusion of trial.
Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail of the applicants and argued that in case the applicants are released on bail, they will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail
It is settled position of law that bail is the rule and committal to jail is an exception in the case of State of Rajasthan Vs. Balchand @ Baliay (1977) 4 SCC 308, the Apex Court observed that refusal of bail is a restriction on the personal liberty of the individual guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution and opined para 2 "The basic rule may perhaps be tersely put as bail, not jail, except where there are circumstances suggestive of fleeing from justice or thwarting the course of justice or creating other troubles in the shape of repeating offences or intimidating witnesses and the like, by the petitioner who seeks enlargement on bail from the court. We do. not intend to be exhaustive but only illustrative." and considering the facts of the case and keeping in mind, the ratio of the Apex Court's judgment in the case of Gudikanti Narasimhulu And Ors vs Public Prosecutor, High Court Of Andhra Pradesh, AIR 1978 SC 429, larger mandate of Article 21 of the constitution of India, the nature of accusations, the nature of evidence in support thereof, the severity of punishment which conviction will entail, the character of the accused-applicant, circumstances which are peculiar to the accused, reasonable possibility of securing the presence of the accused at the trial, reasonable apprehension of the witnesses being tampered with, the larger interest of the public/ State and other circumstances, but without expressing any opinion on the merits, I am of the view that it is a fit case for grant of bail.
Let applicants,Wali Mohammad and Shabhu Pasha be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on their furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions-
1. The applicants shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.
2. The applicants shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.
3. The applicants shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.
It is clarified that anything said in this order is limited to the purpose of determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. The trial court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led unaffected by anything said in this order.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by the petitioner along-with a self attested identity proof of the said person (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number to which the said Aadhar Card is linked.
The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.
Order Date :- 3.8.2021
aks
