Imran v. State of U.P

Court No. - 68 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 48097 of 2023 Applicant :- Imran Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rahul Saxena Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.

¶1Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.

¶2Learned counsel for the applicant submits that F.I.R. of the present case was lodged against the applicant and three others and as per version of the F.I.R. younger brother of the informant had gone to the house of sister-in-law (Bhabhi) of the accused persons as she called him for transaction of some money, where some dispute arose and applicant and other accused persons assaulted him, on account of which he sustained serious injuries. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that initially F.I.R. of the present case was lodged under Sections 308, 323, 504 I.P.C. but after the death of the injured, the case was converted under Section 304 I.P.C. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that admittedly, informant is not an eye-witness of the incident and only eye witness of the present case is aforesaid Bhabhi of accused persons, who in her statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. stated that applicant and co-accused Suheb and Suhail assaulted the deceased, but she in her statement categorically stated that under the sudden provocation they assaulted him as the deceased after entering in her room was trying to outrage her modesty. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that therefore, from the statement of the aforesaid sole eye-witness it appears that applicant and other accused persons were not having any intention to cause death of the deceased. Learned counsel the applicant further submits that it appears that deceased and aforesaid Bhabhi of accused persons were having some affair and thereafter when her marriage was solemnized with somebody else then it was settled between both the sides that they will not meet with each other but on the date of incident, deceased forcibly entered in her house and was trying to outrage her modesty and when applicant and two others, who were her Devars, came to know this fact, then they after entering in the room of their Bhabhi, made assault upon the deceased under the sudden provocation. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that although, medical report of the deceased shows that he sustained as many as 10 injuries but all the injuries were on his non vital parts and even post-mortem report of the deceased suggests that he sustained all the injuries on his non vital parts. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that only general and onmibus allegation has been levelled against all the accused persons including the applicant and no specific allegation has been made against any of the accused. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that co-accused, Mohd. Suhail Rahmani, has already been granted bail by a coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 30.10.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 45664 of 2023 and the case of applicant is not on the worse footing than that of the co-accused as general allegations have been made against all the accused persons. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused have also been mentioned. It has also been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required and is also ready to accept all the conditions which the Court may deem fit to impose upon him. He next submits that applicant is languishing in jail since 28.06.2023, having no criminal history.

¶3Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, he does not deserve any indulgence.

¶4After perusing the record in the light of the submissions made at the bar and after taking an overall view of all the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence and distinguishing the case of present applicant with the co-accused, Rohit Yadav, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, this Court is of the view, that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

¶5Let applicant-Imran, involved in Case Crime No. 156 of 2023, under Sections 304, 323, 504 I.P.C., Police Station Kundarki, District Moradabad, be enlarged on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions:-

(i) The applicant will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever.

(ii) The applicant will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.

(iii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the date 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.

(iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever. 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., may be issued and if 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 I.P.C.

(v) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) 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 and the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A IPC.

¶6The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail in accordance with law.

¶7The bail application is allowed. Order Date :- 21.11.2023 Mustaqeem. High Court of Judicature at Allahabad