Allahabad High Court
Khalik vs State Of U.P. on 23 February, 2023
Bench: Siddharth
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 73
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8845 of 2023
Applicant :- Khalik
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Abdul Mazeed
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Siddharth,J.
Vakalatnama filed by Shri Suneel Kumar Mishra on behalf of the informant is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant;Shri Suneel Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A.
The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Khalik, with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 327 of 2022, under Sections 304,308,323,504 IPC Police Station Mainather, District- Moradabad, during pendency of trial.
There is allegation in the First Information Report that elder brother of the informant had given some amount to the co-accused, Zareef, which he demanded back from him. Thereafter dispute took place between them.The father of the informant went to the applicant,who is Mama of co-accused,Zareef to make his complaint where co-accused, Zareef had abused him and beaten and caused injuries to his father with intention to cause his murder.The mother and sister of the informant tried to save the deceased and they were also beaten by the applicant. The father of the informant suffered injury on head. He was taken to the Nursing Home, Kapoor Company , Moradabad where treatment was went on for five days.Thereafter he was taken to the AIMS Rishikesh, Uttarakhand and was being treated there. Initially First Information Report was lodged under sections 308,323,504 I.P.C.After the deceased died on 19.11.2022 and the implication was converted under section 304 I.P.C. as well.Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that cause of death of the deceased has been found to be septicemia and tuberculosis. Although 13 injuries have been found on the body of the deceased but none of the injuries appear to be fatal to life.The motive has been assigned to the co-accused,Zareef.Applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. He is stated to be 80 years.His role is different from co-accused, Zareef. The applicant is in jail since 3.2.2023 and has no criminal history.
Learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the informant have opposed the bail prayer of the applicant but could not dispute the aforesaid facts.
Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused; submissions of the learned counsel for the parties noted above; finding force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant; keeping view the uncertainty regarding conclusion of trial; one sided investigation by police, ignoring the case of accused side; applicant being under-trial having fundamental right to speedy trial; larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India; considering the dictum of Apex Court in 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; 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 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.
1. The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.
2. The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.
3. The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.
4. That 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;
5. The applicant 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 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 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.
In case the trial has commenced, the trial court will conclude the same within a period one year as per section 309 Cr.P.C.
Order Date :- 23.2.2023
Atul kr. sri.
