Allahabad High Court
Mohammad Irshad vs State Of U.P. on 20 October, 2022
Bench: Siddharth
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 69
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 40535 of 2020
Applicant :- Mohammad Irshad
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Anwar Hussain,Ajit Kumar,Tufail Hasan
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Siddharth,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.
There is allegation in the first information report that the daughter of the informant aged about 22 months has gone missing on the night of 24.08.2020 and her dead body was recovered on 25.08.2020. There were signs of injury on her neck. Prior to the present incident dated 01.08.2020 the applicant and three other co-accused persons had threatened the informant of life. Complaint of the same was made to the higher authorities hence the first information report was lodged.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the implication of the applicant was made on the basis of the statement of two eye witnesses Asgar and Shakir that they have seen the applicant cutting the neck of the child. Learned counsel for the applicant has further submitted that aforesaid witnesses, Asgar and Shakir, have been examined before the trial court as PW-II and PW-V. They have not supported the prosecution case. They have clearly stated that they never saw the applicant cutting the neck of the deceased child by knife. They have been declared hostile. He has submitted that it is a case of false implication. Applicant is in jail since 29.08.2020.
Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the above submissions.
Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, considering the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 and recent judgment dated 11.07.2022 of the Apex Court in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil vs. C.B.I., passed in S.L.P (Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021 and considering 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above their capacity by the under trials and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.
Let the applicant, Mohammad Irshad, involved in Case Crime No. 277 of 2020, under Sections 302 I.P.C, Police Station-Rasoolpur, District- Firozabad 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 subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.
(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.
(ii) 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.
(iii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(iv) In case the applicant misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicants fail 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.
(v) 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.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the complainant is free to move an application for cancellation of bail before this court.
Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.
Order Date :- 20.10.2022
SS
