Called on.
Heard learned counsel Sri Abhishek Yadav, Advocate for the bail-applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and perused the material available on record.
The present bail application has been filed on behalf of the accused-applicant-Aklakh Ahmad, who is involved in Case Crime No. 779 of 2020, under Sections 384, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Kotwali Sitapur, District Sitapur.
The occasion of present bail application has arisen on rejection of the bail plea of the accused-applicant by learned Sessions Judge, Sitapur vide order dated 03.02.2021.
Learned AGA for the State informs that he has received the instructions alongwith C.D. and material papers from the prosecution. Since learned counsel for the bail applicant presses to argue the matter instantly, therefore, learned AGA is also ready to protest the bail-plea, on the basis of material available with him.
Learned counsel, reading over the First Information Report lodged on 30.12.2020, submitted that the accused-applicant has falsely been implicated in the case. On 01.01.2021, the police conducted a raid in the house of present accused-applicant in a horrific manner and assaulted the female members of his family. The present FIR is the outcome of previous enmity of the complainant with the present accused-applicant.
In the above context, learned counsel submitted that there are only general allegations against all the accused including the present accused-applicant, no specific role has been assigned to him, no time and place of the alleged offence is stated in the FIR, as such, no offence is made out against the accused-applicant as the ingredients of the aforementioned Sections are not fulfilled.
Learned counsel further submitted that the present accused-applicant is a public spirited person, who has filed a PIL before the High Court at Lucknow bearing PIL Civil 11813 of 2019, wherein the Hon'ble Court had directed the respondents to take appropriate steps expeditiously in accordance with law. Thereafter, a contempt petition bearing Contempt No. 297 of 2020 was also filed by him, and as a consequence, certain encroachments of the complainant were removed by the Nagar Palika, Sitapur, due to which the complainant is taking revenge.
Learned counsel further submitted that that offence is triable by Magistrate first Class with maximum punishment of three years. Learned counsel further contended that accused-applicant has no other criminal history to his credit. Further submission is that there is no possibility of the accused-applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses. In case the accused-applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail.
Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the accused-applicant.
Keeping into mind the valuable right of personal liberty and the fundamental principle not to disbelieve a person to be innocent unless held guilty and if he is not arraigned with the charge of an offence for which the law has put on him a reverse burden of proving his innocence as, held in the judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and Others reported in [(2018) 3 SCC 22], I find force in the submission of learned counsel for the bail-applicant to enlarge him on bail.
Considering the rival submissions of learned counsel for the parties, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusation, complicity of the accused-applicant, gravity of the offence and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the period for which he is in jail, I find force in the argument of learned counsel for the accused-applicant. The accused-applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case.
Let applicant- Aklakh Ahmad @ Haseen Ahmad be released on bail in Case Crime No. 779 of 2020, under Sections 384, 504, 506 IPC, registered at Police Station Kotwali, District Sitapur, on his furnishing a personal bond worth Rs. 100,000/- (One lac) and two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following additional conditions, which are being 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.
Order Date :- 17.2.2021 kkv/ [Vikas Kunvar Srivastav,J.]