1. Heard learned counsel for the accused-applicants as well as learned Additional Government Advocate and gone through the entire record.
2. By means of this application under Section 439 CrPC, the accused-applicants seek bail in FIR No.0192 of 2020, under Sections 307 and 506 IPC lodged at Police Station Kotwali, District Kheri.
It is alleged that when victims, wife of the complainant, Huma Begham along with her sister-in-law, Seema Begh were going to market to buy goods on 05.02.2020, at 9.30 p.m., the accused-applicants and co-accused, riding on two motorcycles, came and, fired at them as a result thereof, Huma Begham and Seema Begh received firearm injuries.
3. Learned counsel for the accused-applicants submits that the complainant is a politically connected and active person; he is a Corporater; earlier also, he tried to falsely implicate the accused-applicants in a case registered as Crime/FIR No.039 of 2020, under Sections 307/506 IPC, however, the police filed final report in their favour; another Crime/FIR No.053 of 2020, under Sections 147, 452, 323, 504, 506 and 325 IPC, Police Station Kotwali City, Kheri was also lodged by the present complainant. The learned counsel has further submitted that the FIR is false; two muslim women would not venture out in the night during winter season for market. The learned counsel has further submitted that the accused-applicants have been falsely implicated.
4. On the other hand, Mr. Rao Narendra Singh, learned Additional Government Advocate, has opposed the bail and, submitted that the injuries caused to Huma Beghum cannot be said to be minor, rather she received serious injuries and, therefore, she was referred to Trauma Center, Lucknow. The learned A.G.A. further submits that the accused-applicants are not entitled to be released on bail.
5. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, the fact that the accused-applicants have been languishing in jail since 14.09.2020, injuries, though alleged to have been caused by firearm, are not serious in nature; as per allegations, the accused fired only one shot, if they had any intention to kill, they would have opened many rounds, I find it to be a fit case for grant of bail.
6. Let applicants-Azmat alias Munnu Raja and Raja Khan alias Mannu, accused of above-mentioned FIR/crime number, be released on bail on each of them furnishing a personal bond and two local and reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions, which are imposed in the interest of justice:-
(i) the applicant(s) 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;
(ii). the applicant(s) shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of their absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against them under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code;
(iii). in case, the applicant(s) misuse(s) the liberty of bail and in order to secure their presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant(s) fail(s) 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; and
(iv) the applicant(s) 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 default of this condition is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of their bail and proceed against them in accordance with law.
[D.K.Singh,J.] Order Date :- 6.4.2021 MVS/-