Allahabad High Court
Azmat vs State Of U.P. on 3 May, 2024
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:79650-DB
Court No. - 47
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 4342 of 2016
Appellant :- Azmat
Respondent :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Appellant :- Imran Mabood Khan,Arbaz Danish,Sharda Prasad Mishra,Zia Naz Zaidi
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Kamlesh Kumar Dwivedi
Hon'ble Arvind Singh Sangwan,J.
Hon'ble Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra,J.
Order on Criminal Misc. 2nd Bail Application
Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned AGA for the State and perused the material available on record.
This is the second bail application filed on behalf of the appellant-Azmat in S.T. No.514 of 2014 (State Vs. Imran and others) arising out of Case Crime No.545 of 2014, under Sections 302/ 149, 201/ 149, 147 of I.P.C. Police Station Hariparvat, District Agra. First bail application of the appellant-Azmat was dismissed on 06.12.2018 for want of prosecution.
The is the second application on behalf of appellant for grant of suspension.
Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that as per custody certificate 01.06.2023, the appellant has undergone almost 10 years of actual sentence and more than 11 years of total sentence including remission and he has no criminal antecedents.
It is submitted that as per the prosecution version, the informant stated that his brother deceased Pramod Kumar was having a mobile phone and received a call from co-accused Anwar with whom he is having some money dealing. The accused left the house and thereafter his wife called him in the morning when the deceased informed that he is sitting at the house of Anwar and further told that he is having money dealing with other co-accused, namely, Imran, Arman, Sagufta-wife of Arman and appellant-Azmat. Initially, the F.I.R. was registered as a missing person report with the allegation that these persons have kidnapped the brother of the informant and have killed him.
Learned counsel for the appellant further submitted that on 16th of June, 2016, all the accused were arrested and from their joint pointing of a dead body was recovered from graveyard along with a motorcycle and a plastic tank from the place of occurrence.
As per the postmortem report, the deceased died due to strangulation and his thigh was found fractured. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that only evidence against the appellant is that the wife of the deceased has given photo copy of cheque of Rs. 4,00,000/- issued by co-accused Sagufta and Rs. 2,70,000/- by the appellant-Azmat favouring the deceased. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that both cheques were post dated cheques and the date was yet to come, therefore, even in case of any money dealing of the deceased with the accused-appellant Azmat Ali, he has paid the money by way of giving a post dated cheque.
Learned counsel for the appellant further submitted that co-accused Sagufta has already been granted the concession of bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court. He further submitted that this case is based on circumstantial evidence and the matter of final disposal of appeal whether the chain is complete.
Learned counsel further submitted that the appeal may take some time for its final disposal and the case of the appellant is covered in light of the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Saudan Singh Vs. State of U.P., Criminal Appeal No.308 of 2022 (Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.4633 of 2021) dated 25.02.2022. He next argued that the appellant has no criminal antecedents. Accordingly, he requests for bail. Learned Counsel for the appellant undertakes that he will argue the appeal whenever it is listed next.
The State counsel as per custody certificate could not dispute the factual position of the matter as argued above.
After considering the learned counsel for the parties and considering the fact that present appeal is the year 2016 and the appeal is not likely to be listed for final disposal in near future and considering the total sentence of appellant including remission is 11 years, the remaining sentences is suspended, without further commenting on the merits of the case, this Court is inclined to release the appellant-Azmat on bail.
It is made clear that if the appellant found involved in any subsequent FIR, the suspension of sentence will be revoked automatically.
After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and the totality of the case, in particular, detention period of the appellant Azmat and no criminal history, we find that the appeal may take some time for its final disposal and the case of the appellant Azmat is covered by the judgement passed by Supreme Court in the case of Saudan Singh vs. State of U.P. in Criminal Appeal No. 308/2022 arising out of SLP (Crl.) No. 4633 of 2021 and case against Chavilal Sonkar where both the injured witnesses have not supported the prosecution version, and without further commenting on the merits of the case, this Court is inclined to release the appellants on bail.
Let appellant-Azmat convicted and sentenced in the above mentioned sessions trial, be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- (Fifty Thousand) and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.
Half of the fine imposed shall be deposited within three months after release and remaining fine shall remain stayed, and in case of failure in depositing the amount of fine within the stipulated period, the trial court will take coercive action against the appellant.
On acceptance of bail bond and personal bond, the lower court shall transmit photostat copies thereof to this Court for being kept on the record.
Order on memo of appeal
List this appeal for final hearing in its due course.
In the meanwhile, Registry to prepare paper book, if not already prepared.
Order Date :- 3.5.2024
Anurag/-
