Court No. - 69
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 52114 of 2019 Applicant :- Ashkar Hussain And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Anjani Kumar Rai,Ashok Kumar Rai,Sri Mangala Prasad Rai, Snr. Adv.
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Irshad Ahmad
Hon'ble Yashwant Varma,J.
Heard Mr Ashok Kumar Rai, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Irshad Ahmad, who has entered appearance on behalf of the informant as well as Sri Nafees Ahmad, the learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicants in Case Crime No. 385 of 2019, under Sections 147, 148, 452, 323, 302, 325 I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali, District- Fatehpur with the prayer to enlarge them on bail.
For the purposes of evaluating the prayer for bail, the Court is firstly apprised that although the applicant No. 1 has averred that he has no previous criminal history, he had been convicted in S.T. No. 53 of 1992 under Section 308 I.P.C. He was imposed a sentence of one year rigorous imprisonment and fine. That order of conviction attained finality consequent to criminal appeal being Criminal Appeal No. 2681 of 1984 (Ejaz Husain and Others Vs. State of U.P.) preferred by him, being dismissed on 15 July 2010 subject only to the modification that the sentence of imprisonment was reduced to the period already undergone. In that view of the matter, the Court finds no ground to enlarge the applicant No. 1 on bail.
The prayer as addressed on behalf of Applicant No. 1 namely, Ashkar Hussain is consequently refused.
Insofar as the applicant Nos. 2 and 3 are concerned, the bail is sought on the ground of parity and the attention of the Court is invited to the orders passed on Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 48174 of 2019 (Razia Ashkar Vs. State of U.P.) and Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 50195 of 2019 (Nazia Ashkar Vs. State of U.P.). Learned counsels appearing for the opposite parties do not dispute that the role assigned to the applicants 2 and 3 is similar and that the orders passed in the aforementioned applications would consequently govern. The applicant Nos. 2 and 3 are otherwise stated to have no criminal history.
Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant Nos. 2 and 3 but could not point out anything material to the contrary.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as also the submissions noticed above, without commenting upon merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant Nos. 2 and 3 are entitled to be released on bail.
Let the applicant Nos. 2 and 3 namely, Shagjar Hussain and Arshad Hussain, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on their furnishing a personal bond 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 Nos. 2 and 3 shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.
(ii) The applicant Nos. 2 and 3 shall file an undertaking to the effect that they 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.
(iii) The applicant Nos. 2 and 3 shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. In case of their absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against them under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(iv) In case the applicant Nos. 2 and 3 misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant Nos. 2 and 3 fail to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation then the Trial Court shall initiate proceedings against them in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(v) The applicant Nos. 2 and 3 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 Nos. 2 and 3 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 them in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 26.11.2019 Arun K. Singh (Yashwant Varma, J.)