Allahabad High Court
Mohd. Ladle vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. on 16 May, 2024
Author: Jaspreet Singh
Bench: Jaspreet Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:37625
Court No. - 21
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 14164 of 2023
Applicant :- Mohd. Ladle
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.
Counsel for Applicant :- Satendra Nath Rai,Akhilesh Kumar Mishra,Arpit Dwivedi,Piyush Tripathi
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Jaspreet Singh,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State-respondent.
2. By means of the instant bail application, the applicant seeks bail in respect of Case Crime No.778 of 2023, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 506, 307, 406 IPC, relating to Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Gonda.
3. The submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is that the FIR has been lodged by the complainant alleging therein that the son of the complainant viz. Shubham Tiwari deals in fertilizers under the name and style of Tiwari Fertilizers. It is alleged that the son of the complainant had extended some credit to present applicant Mohd. Ladley. Repeated demands were made for return of the aforesaid money, but it was not done and it is in the aforesaid context that on 2.9.2023 the son of the complainant had gone to recover the aforesaid sum from the applicant Ladley. While returning home from his shop, the applicant Ladley and other co-accused persons including the applicant started beating with sticks. It is further alleged that the applicant hit the son of the complainant on his head with the butt of his pistol with an intent to kill him, due to which he got severely injured. It is in the aforesaid backdrop, the FIR has been lodged.
4. It is further submitted that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the instant case. However, apparently relating to fertilizer business, certain transactions between the son of the complainant and the applicant were done. It is urged that general allegation of hitting the son of the complainant has been levelled against the applicant.
5. It is also submitted that in a similar role, the co-accused namely Mohd. Irfan @ Kaju and Kajjan have already been enlarged on bail by this Court by means of order dated 3.04.2024 and 26.4.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Applications No.2993 of 2024 and 13932 of 2023 respectively. The copies of the aforesaid bail orders are provided to the Court for its perusal.
6. It is in this context, learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant is seeking parity with the co-accused namely Mohd. Irfan & Kaju and Kajjan who have already been enlarged on bail.
7. It is further submitted that in paragraph-19 of the bail application, it is stated that the applicant has four cases to his credit. In Case Crime No.890 of 2021, it is stated that to the best knowledge of the applicant, neither any summon was issued by any competent court nor served on him. in Case Crime No.209 of 2018 no chargesheeet has been filed against the applicant whereas the chargesheet has only been filed against the other co-accused Kajjan and Kaju. In Case Crime No.6 of 2023, the applicant has been given the benefit of Section 41-A Cr.P.C. and till date no chargesheet has been filed against him and in Case Crime No.765 of 2013, the parties have entered into a compromise, thus no chargesheet was filed and the case was decided vide judgment dated 19.04.2022.
8. It is also urged that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away after being released on bail or tampering with the witnesses. In case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail.
9. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail, however, could not dispute the aforesaid facts.
10. Considering the rival submissions, the facts and circumstances of the case and the material available on record as well as considering the nature of allegations and accusation against the applicant, the severity of the punishment if convicted and the period of incarceration as well as the fact that no apprehension has been expressed by the learned AGA that the applicant is at the risk of fleeing justice or that he would tamper with evidence or influence any witness, hence, at this stage, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
11. Let the applicant Mohd. Laadle involved in FIR/Case Crime No.778 of 2023, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 506, 307, 406 IPC, relating to Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Gonda be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.
12. At the time of executing required sureties the following conditions shall be imposed in the interest of justice.
(i) 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.
(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails 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.
(iv) 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.
13. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
Order Date :- 16.5.2024
ank
