Mauseena v. State of U.P

Court No. - 72 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 49778 of 2023 Applicant :- Mauseena Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Avinash Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶1List has been revised.

¶2Heard Sri Avinash Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Arun Kumar Mishra, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶3Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 349 of 2023, under Sections 363, 368 of I.P.C., Police Station Kairana, District Shamli, during the pendency of trial.

¶4As per prosecution story, the informant has instituted the FIR alleging that his minor daughter aged about 14 years was missing since 30.06.2023 at about 10:00 PM.

¶5Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. The applicant is not named in the FIR. Even his name has not been mentioned in the statement of the informant recorded u/s 161 Cr.P.C. but subsequent to it, a supplementary statement of the informant was recorded by the Investigating Officer whereby he has stated that when the informant reached the village, the applicant along with his brother Irfan was found with his daughter and the applicant let them run away in his presence. He has nothing to do with the said offence. The offence committed, if any is by Irfan. The applicant has been made an accused by the informant only on the ground that he is the brother of escaped person Irfan.

¶6Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicant to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against him. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicant have also been touched upon at length. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 25.09.2023. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate with trial.

¶7Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant and also the fact that the applicant has no criminal history.

¶8Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, pending trial and considering the complicity of accused, severity of punishment, at this stage, 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.

¶9Let the applicant-Mauseena involved in aforementioned case crime number be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. i. The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial. ii. The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness. iii. The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted. iv. The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail. v. 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 or tamper with the evidence.

¶10In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.

¶11Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

¶12It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion on the testimony of the witnesses. (Justice Krishan Pahal) Order Date :- 30.11.2023 Siddhant High Court of Judicature at Allahabad