Asif @ Inne vs State Of U.P. Through Principal ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 16448 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 65
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 4559 of 2022
 

 
Appellant :- Asif @ Inne
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Through Principal Secretary(Home) Govt.
 
Counsel for Appellant :- Shashank Mishra,Archana Hans
 
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.

Heard Shri Shashank Mishra, learned counsel for the appellant and Shri Ravindra Kumar Singh learned A.G.A. for the State.

Despite service of notice upon respondent no. 3 is served, but no one has appeared on behalf of respondent no. 3.

The present criminal appeal under Section 14-A(2) Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been filed by the appellant Asif @ Inne to set aside the impugned order dated 11.04.2022 whereby the Special Judge (SC/ST Act)/ Additional Sessions Judge, Allahabad has rejected the bail application No. 1196 of 2022 of the appellant moved by him in Case Crime No. 58 of 2022, under Sections 302, 120-B, 34 I.P.C. and Section 7 of Criminal Law Amendment Act, and Section 4/5 of The Explosive Substances Act, 1908 and Section 3(2)(v), of SC/ST Act, Police Station Kareli District Allahabad.

Brief facts of the case are that the first information report dated 27.02.2022 was lodged by Sub Inspector Girish Chandra Rai, against the named co-accused person Sanjay Kol stating that on 27.02.2022 at 21:43 hours two persons namely co-accused Sanjay Kol and Arjun Kol reached Ravi Bike Service Center by their bicycles at the same time a boy with a cycle fell on the ground and there was an explosion in which a cyclist was seriously injured and died. The deceased is the cousin of accused Sanjay Kol.

After lodging the first information report, inquest report of the injured persons was conducted on 28.02.2022; postmortem report was also conducted on 28.02.2022. After recording the statement of other prosecution witnesses, charge-sheet has been submitted against 9 persons including the appellant and the Investigating Officer exonerated the named co-accused Sanjay Kol. The appellant was arrested on 09.03.2022.

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. It is further submitted that the appellant is not named in the first information report. The name of the appellant has surfaced on the basis of an information received by the Investigating Officer from police informer and on the basis of information, the Investigating Officer arrested 9 persons; firstly he arrested 3 accused persons and later on 6 accused persons and on the basis of confessional statement the appellant has been implicated in the present case.

It has also been submitted that co-accused, Saiyad Shafil Shafeeq, Sarfaraz, Anis and Danish @ Muzammil having similar role, have already been enlarged on bail by the Coordinate Benches of this Court vide order dated 23.09.2022, 27.09.2022 and 12.10.2022 in Criminal Appeal Nos. 3995 of 2022, 3979 of 2022, 7311 of 2022 and 7331 of 2022, and the appellant is also entitled to be enlarged on bail on the ground of parity.

It is further submitted that there is no possibility of the appellant of fleeing away after being released on bail or tampering with the witnesses. In case the appellant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail.

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has supported the order passed by the Special Judge and vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant. But he could not point out any material to the contrary. He further submits that in case the applicant is released on bail, he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail.

After considering the facts of the present case it prima facie appears that;

(a) The appellant is not named in the first information report;

(b) Sole named accused Sanjay Kol exonerated by the Investigating Officer;

(c) On the basis of information received from police informer, the appellant and other 8 accused persons implicated in the present case;

(d) Co-accused, Saiyad Shafil Shafeeq, Sarfaraz, Anis and Danish @ Muzammil having similar role, have already been granted bail by the Coordinate Benches of this Court;

It is a settled law that while granting bail, the court has to keep in mind the nature of accusation, the nature of the evidence in support thereof, the severity of the punishment which conviction will entail, the character of the accused, the circumstances which are peculiar to the accused, his role and involvement in the offence, his involvement in other cases and reasonable apprehension of the witnesses being tampered with.

Taking into account the totality of facts and keeping in mind, the ratio of the Apex Court's judgment in the case of State of Rajasthan v. Balchand @ Baliay (1977) 4 SCC 308, Gudikanti Narasimhulu And Ors., v. Public Prosecutor, High Court Of Andhra Pradesh, AIR 1978 SC 429, Ram Govind Upadhyay v. Sudarshan Singh & Ors., (2002) 3 SCC 598, Prasanta Kumar Sarkar v. Ashis Chatterjee & Anr., (2010) 14 SCC 496 and Mahipal v. Rajesh Kumar & Anr., (2020) 2 SCC 118, 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. Hence, the present criminal appeal is allowed and impugned order dated 11.04.2022 is set aside.

Let appellant/applicant, Asif @ Inne be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions:

(i) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat, or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

(ii) The applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses.

(iii) 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 of Cr.P.C.

(iv) 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 the trial court.

(v) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel.

(vi) The applicant 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. If in the opinion of the trial court that 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 in accordance with law.

The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously in accordance with law after the release of the applicant, if there is no other legal impediment.

It is made clear that the observations made in this order are 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.

The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by the applicant 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 :- 10.11.2022

Ishan