HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. – 72
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. – 54319 of 2019
Applicant :- Ajwar
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Syed Shahnawaz Shah
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Bablu Singh
Counter affidavit filed is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Pramod Singh holding brief of Sri Bablu Singh, learnedcounsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
Despite time granted no counter affidavit has been filed by the counsel for the informant.
Counsel for the applicant has submittedthat it is a case of false implication. Theapplicant is the elder brother of the husband of the victim (jeth) and he has been falsely implicated in this case on account of marital dispute of the victim with her husband. Ithas been submittedthat in the FIR the allegation under Section 354 IPC was only leveled against the applicant. Thereafter, thechargesheet wassubmitted bythe Investigating Officeragainst the husband of the victim and his anotherbrother, Abdulla. Theapplicant was not charge sheeted.Against thecognizance order of Magistrate theinformant preferred a revision stating that the other accuseds have been wrongly exonerated and thereafter all the accuseds were summoned by thelearned Magistrate fortrial forcommitting offence under Section 354 (B) IPC. Not satisfied with the summoning order of the Magistrate a revision was again preferred and now the applicant has been summoned for facing the trial for offence under Sections 376/Section511, Section498-A, Section323, Section324, Section504, Section506, Section307 I.P.C. and Section 3/Section4 Dowry Prohibition Act. It has been submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated by the victim in the present case on account marital dispute. The applicant is in jail since 24.09.2019 and has a criminal history of 7 cases explained in paragraph nos. 24 to 28 in the affidavit in support of the bail application. It has been submitted that in all the 7 cases against the applicant either he has not been chargesheeted or final report has been submitted. Applicant is not an accused in any case, except Case Crime no. 71 of 2012.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by learned counsel for the applicant.
After considering the rival submissions noted hereinabove, larger mandate of SectionArticle 21 of the Constitution of India and the material brought on record and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
Let the applicant-Ajwar, be released on bail in Case Crime No. 144 of 2014, under Sections- 498-A, 323, 324, 504, 506, 307, 376/511 SectionIPC and Section 3/Section4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station- Mahila Thana, District- Meerut, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice :-
1. The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.
2. The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.
3. The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.
Order Date :- 11.12.2019