Allahabad High Court
Mumtaj And Another vs State Of U.P. on 22 December, 2023
Author: Siddharth
Bench: Siddharth
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:243109
Court No. - 64
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 51568 of 2023
Applicant :- Mumtaj And Another
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Manu Sharma,Dinesh Kumar Pandey
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Arvind Kumar Mishra
Hon'ble Siddharth,J.
Heard Shri Manu Sharma, learned counsel for the applicants; Shri Arvind Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A for the State.
The submission is that co-accused, Barkat alias Sameer, has already been enlarged on bail vide Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 53984 of 2023 on 16.12.2023 and the case of the applicants stands on identical footing, hence the applicants are also entitled for bail for the reasons given in bail application of co-accused on the ground of parity. The applicant no.1 and applicant no.2 are in jail since 21.10.2023 and 31.10.2023; respectively.
On the other hand learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the informant have opposed the prayer for bail.
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 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 applicants have made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.
Let the applicants, Mumtaj and Muneeb, involved in Case Crime No. 290 of 2019 (Special Session Trial No.148 of 2020, under Sections 302, 120-B IPC, Police Station- Paniyara District- Maharajganj, be released on bail on their 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.
1. The applicants shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.
2. The applicants shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.
3. The applicants shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.
4. That the applicants 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;
5. The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence and 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 to ensure presence of the applicant.
6. The applicants 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 default of this condition is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
Order Date :- 22.12.2023
Atul kr. sri.
