Allahabad High Court
Shahjad vs State Of U.P. on 19 October, 2022
Bench: Manish Mathur
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 71
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 46610 of 2022
Applicant :- Shahjad
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Ajay Kumar
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.569 of 2021, under Sections 302, 307, 394 IPC, P.S. Dhaulana, District Hapur.
3. As per contents of FIR, which has been lodged against unknown persons with the allegation that three unknown persons attacked and looted the uncle of informant while at the same time opening fire upon him due to which the uncle suffered grievous injuries and subsequently passed away. The other person accompanying him namely Amit also suffered injuries.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has not committed the present offence. It is further argued that no prima facie case is made out against the applicant. He is not named in the FIR. Referring to the statement of the injured it was also argued that he has also not disclosed name of the applicant for committing the present offence. It is further argued that applicant was arrested by the police on the basis of confessional statement of one Imran who has already been enlarged on bail by coordiante Bench of this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 16745 of 2022 so is co-accused Shahid who has been admitted to bail in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.44177 of 2022. The applicant has explained criminal history against him in paragraph-2 of Affidavit accompanying the Bail Application. Recovery is false, planted and is not supported by the independent evidence. He is languishing in jail since 08.06.2022 and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.
5. Learned A.G.A. appearing on behalf of State has opposed bail application with the submission that that the injured witness indicated the name of applicant as being used by the unknown persons due to which applicant has been taken into custody.
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 the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the material on record, prima facie, and subject to further evidence being led in trial, It appears that applicant has been taken into custody only on the basis of alleged extra judicial confessional statement of co-accused Imran who has also been enlarged on bail. The applicant is in jail since 08.06.2022 and as yet trial is at an early stage, as such, without expressing any opinion on the merits of case, this Court finds, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case.
8. Accordingly bail application is allowed.
9. Let applicant Shahjad, 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.
Order Date :- 19.10.2022
kvg/-
