SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Ahmad Ali vs State Of U.P. Through Secretary … on 17 August, 2022

Try out our Premium Member services: Virtual Legal Assistant, Query Alert Service and an ad-free experience. Free for one month and pay only if you like it.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

?Court No. – 69

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. – 569 of 2022

Applicant :- Ahmad Ali

Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Through Secretary Home At Lucknow

Counsel for Applicant :- Sundeep Shukla,Mohd Zubair Khan,Shivendra Raj Singhal

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Mohd. Aslam

Hon’ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material brought on record.

It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case due to malicious intention just to harass the applicant. The applicant is father-in-law of the victim. The informant with an oblique motive to harass the applicant has implicated the applicant in the present case. No specific role has been assigned to the applicant only general allegation has been has been made in the present case. It is next submitted that a concocted and false story has been set up by the prosecution whereas the applicant has not committed any offence as alleged. There is no independent, impartial reliable eye witness of the alleged incident. First Information Report, statement of informant and statement of witnesses are contradictory, hence entire prosecution story is doubtful. The applicant has neither demanded any dowry nor given any physical or mental agony to the deceased. There is neither any direct or indirect evidence against the applicant which remotely connect the applicant with the present case, as the applicant had disown his son which was published in local newspaper hence applicant has no concern with the present case. The applicant has no motive to commit the alleged offence. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused has also been touched upon at length. It is further submitted that there is no possibility of applicant either fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses. Applicant is in jail since 26.11.2021, having no previous criminal history he undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty, if granted.

Learned A.G.A. and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the first informant have vehemently opposed the bail prayer of the applicant without disputing the aforesaid submissions of the learned counsel for the applicant and submitted that in case applicant is released on bail he will misuse the liberty of bail.

Having heard the submissions of learned counsel of both sides, nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment, and larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh v. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 2 SCC 22 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it to be a case of bail.

Let applicant- Ahmad Ali, be released on bail arising out of Case Crime No. 242 if 2020, under Sections – 498A, 304B, 323/34, 504, 506 IPC and 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station- Mansoorpur, District- Muzaffar Nagar, on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:- :-

(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.

The 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 and send the applicant to prison.

It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case.

Order Date :- 17.8.2022

ssm

 

 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Copyright © 2022 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation
×

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation