Allahabad High Court
Sakib vs State Of U.P. on 20 December, 2022
Bench: Manish Mathur
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 71
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7573 of 2020
Applicant :- Sakib
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Mehendra Kumar Singh,Pankaj Srivastava
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of State and perused the record.
2. This first bail application has been filed with regard to Case Crime No.496 of 2016, under Sections 302, 394/34 IPC, registered at Police Station Mandi, District Saharanpur.
3. As per contents of FIR, the incident allegedly took place on 14.12.2016 when the applicant allegedly shot at the nephew of first informant when he was returning from his shop. It is alleged that the first informant is an eye witness account and applicant was apprehended from the spot.
4. Learned counsel for applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the charges levelled against him and that in fact the first informant nor any other person is an eye witness which would be amply clear from the deposition of first informant as P.W.1 in which he has not supported the prosecution version and has clearly indicated that he was not an eye witness and came to know about the incident subsequently. It is submitted that thereafter all the witnesses of fact as P.W. 2, 3 and 4 have been examined with none of them supporting the prosecution version due to which P.W.2 and P.W 3 have been declared hostile. It is submitted that applicant is under incarceration as an under trial since 14.12.2016 with only five prosecution witnesses having been examined out of a total of 23 prosecution witnesses and as such there is no hope of early conclusion of trial.
5. Learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of State has opposed the bail application but does not dispute the fact situation.
6. Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Sanjay Chandra v. Central Bureau of Investigation, reported in (2012) 1 SCC 40 has specifically held that bail is to be a norm and an under-trial is not required to be in jail for ever pending trial. Relevant paragraphs of the judgment are as under :-
"21. In bail applications, generally, it has been laid down from the earliest times that the object of bail is to secure the appearance of the accused person at his trial by reasonable amount of bail. The object of bail is neither punitive nor preventative. Deprivation of liberty must be considered a punishment, unless it is required to ensure that an accused person will stand his trial when called upon. The courts owe more than verbal respect to the principle that punishment begins after conviction, and that every man is deemed to be innocent until duly tried and duly found guilty."
"27. This Court, time and again, has stated that bail is the rule and committal to jail an exception. It has also observed that refusal of bail is a restriction on the personal liberty of the individual guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution."
7. Considering submissions advanced by learned counsel for parties and upon perusal of material available on record, it appears that although FIR has been lodged with the assertion that first informant has an eye witness account with regard to the role of applicant in causing murder of his nephew but subsequently the first informant as P.W.1 has not supported the prosecution version and has clearly retracted the allegation. Other witnesses of fact as P.W. 2,3 and 4 have also not supported the prosecution version with P.W 2 and 3 being declared hostile. Applicant is in jail since 14.12.2016 with only five prosecution witnesses having been examined out of a total of 23 prosecution witnesses.
8. Looking to the nature of allegations levelled against the applicant and submission made in the bail application, without expressing any opinion on the merits of case and considering the nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, particularly since no reasonable apprehension of tampering with the witnesses has been alleged, prima facie, this Court finds, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case.
9. Accordingly bail application is allowed.
10. Let applicant, Sakib, involved in the aforesaid case 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 which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-
(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.
Trial court is directed to expedite the trial without granting any undue adjournment.
Order Date :- 20.12.2022
Subodh/-
