Allahabad High Court
Momin Khan vs State Of U.P. on 11 December, 2023
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:233949
Court No. - 76
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 22399 of 2023
Applicant :- Momin Khan
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Rakesh Pathak,Martand Kumar
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Kumar Kartikeya
Hon'ble Vikram D. Chauhan,J.
1. Learned A.G.A. for the State submits that instructions have been received and has no objection in case the bail application is heard on merits.
2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
3. This is the second bail application. First bail application was rejected by order dated 30.08.2023. The applicant is in jail since 15.06.2021. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that till date evidence in the present has not been recorded and in view of the judgment rendered in R.D. Upadhyay vs. State of Andhra Pradesh, 1996 (3) SCC 422, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail. The applicant has no previous criminal history.
4. Learned counsel for the informant and Learned A.G.A. for the State have opposed the prayer for bail, however, do not dispute the law laid down by the Apex Court in R.D. UPadhyay (supra).
5. Learned AGA for the State has not brought any fact or circumstances to indicate criminal history or antecedents of the applicant which would disentitle the applicant for Bail.
6. It is not the case of the State that the applicant has not cooperated in the investigation or proceedings before the trial court.
7. The principle that Bail is a rule and Jail is an exception has been well recognised by Apex Court more specifically on the touch stone of Article 21 of the Constitution. The said principle has been reiterated by the Apex Court in Satyendra Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, 2022 (10) SCC 51. Learned AGA for the State has not shown any exceptional circumstances which would warrant denial of bail to the applicant.
8. No material, facts or circumstances has been shown by learned AGA for the State that the accused may tamper with the evidence or witnesses or the accused is of such character that his mere presence at large would intimidate the witnesses or that accused will use his liberty to subvert justice or tamper with the evidence.
10. It is settled principle of law that the object of bail is to secure the attendance of the accused at the trial. No material particulars or circumstances suggestive of the applicant fleeing from justice or thwarting the course of justice or creating other troubles in the shape of repeating offences or intimidating witnesses and the like have been shown by learned AGA for the State.
11. Learned AGA for the State has not shown any material or circumstances that the accused/applicant is not entitled to bail in larger interests of the public or State.
11-A. The Apex Court in R.D. Upadhyay Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh and others, 1996 (3) SCC 422, has observed as under:
"So far as the cases regarding attempt to murder are concerned, we direct that the cases which are pending for more than 2 years, the under-trials shall be released on bail forthwith to the satisfaction of the respective trial courts. Persons facing trial for Kidnapping, Theft, Cheating, Arms Act, Counterfeiting, Custom, Under Section 326 IPC, Under Section 324 IPC, Riots and Under Section 354 IPC who are in jail for a period of more than one year, shall, be released on bail forthwith to the satisfaction of the trial courts concerned. There may be cases where the under-trial persons may not be in a position to furnish sureties etc. In those cases, the trial courts may consider-keeping in view the facts of each case especially the period spent in jail-releasing them on bail by furnishing persons bonds."
12. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, submissions of learned counsel for the parties 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.
13. Let the applicant Momin Khan involved in Case Crime No. 571 of 2021, under Sections 420, 406, 467, 468, 471, 120B, 34 IPC, Police Station Kotwali, District Ghaziabad, be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions:-
i. The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.
ii. The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness.
iii. The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted and/or the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required.
iv. The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.
v. 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.
vi. The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court.
vii. In the event, the applicant changes residential address, the applicant shall inform the court concerned about new residential address in writing.
14. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.
Order Date :- 11.12.2023
S.Prakash
