Allahabad High Court
Vajid @ Matu vs State Of U.P. on 3 February, 2021
Bench: Saurabh Shyam Shamshery
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
Judgment reserved on 29.1.2021.
Delivered on 03.2.2021.
Court No. - 83
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 28727 of 2018
Applicant :- Vajid @ Matu
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Vikash Chandra Tiwari,Santosh Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J.
Heard Santosh Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. and perused the record.
The applicant has approached this Court by way of filing the present Criminal Misc. Bail Application seeking enlargement on bail in Case Crime No.328 of 2015, under Sections 302, 34, 404, 377 and 511 I.P.C., Police Station-Sahibabad, District-Ghaziabad.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that this is a second bail application on behalf of the applicant as the first bail application was rejected on 23.2.2018 by this Court for want of prosecution. All the three co-accused were granted bail by this Court through orders dated 01.7.2015, 09.7.2015 and 26.8.2015 which are placed on record of this application through a supplementary affidavit. Counsel further brought into the notice of this Court by showing order sheet of the trial court which is filed through a supplementary affidavit that till date not a single prosecution witness has been examined. He is languishing in jail since 12.3.2015, there is no likelihood of early disposal of trial and the applicant undertakes that if enlarged on bail, he will never misuse his liberty and will co-operate in the trial.
Learned A.G.A. appearing on behalf of the State has opposed the bail and submitted that there are serious charges against the applicant under Sections 302, 34, 404, 377, 511 I.P.C. and during investigation the role of the applicant is causing death of deceased by causing fire arm injury, which is corroborated with the post mortem report of the deceased. However, learned A.G.A. has not disputed that all the three co-accused were granted bail by this Court and till date not a single prosecution witness is examined.
Law on bail is well settled that 'Bail is rule and jail is exception'. Bail should not be granted or rejected in a mechanical manner as it concerns the liberty of a person. At the time of considering an application for bail, the Court must take into account certain factors such as the existence of a prima facie case against the accused, the gravity of the allegations, position and status of the accused, the likelihood of the accused fleeing from justice and repeating the offence, the possibility of tampering with the witnesses and obstructing the Courts as well as the criminal antecedents of the accused. It is also well settled that the Court while considering an application for bail must not go into deep into merits of the matter such as question of credibility and reliability of prosecution witnesses which can only be tested during the trial. Even ground of parity is one of the above mentioned aspects which are essentially required to be considered while considering application for bail. It is also well settled that the grant or refusal of bail is entirely within the discretion of the judge hearing the matter and though that discretion is unfettered, it must be exercised judiciously and in a humane manner, compassionately and not in whimsical manner. Conditions for the grant of bail ought not to be so strict as to be incapable of compliance, thereby making the grant of bail illusory.
Considering the rival submission, material available on record, the period of detention already undergone, the unlikelihood of early conclusion of trial, absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence, relevant factors mentioned above, particularly that all the three co-accused are on bail by the orders passed by this Court way back in 2015 and till date no prosecution witness has been examined and also considering that prosecution's story is based on circumstantial evidence, name of the applicant is disclosed in the confessional statement of co-accused, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case.
Let the applicant Vajid @ Matu, involved in Case Crime No.328 of 2015, under Sections 302, 34, 404, 377 and 511 I.P.C., Police Station-Sahibabad, District-Ghaziabad 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 will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever.
(ii) The applicant will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.
(iii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the date 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.
(iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever. 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., may be issued and if 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 I.P.C.
(v) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) 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 and the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A IPC.
(vi) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the applicant.
The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.
The bail application is allowed.
The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.
The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.
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:-03.2.2021
SB
