1. Heard Sri Dilip Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Adesh Srivastava, learned counsel for the complainant, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State and perused the records.
2. It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the F.I.R. of the present case was lodged against eight accused persons including the applicant wherein general allegation of assaulting the deceased with lathi danda has been levelled against all the accused persons. Thereafter, it has been specified that co-accused Munnu had assaulted the deceased with butt of the country made pistol and also opened fire. He submits that the medical examination report of the deceased shows that he has received five injuries on his persons. The deceased died on the the next day of the incident. As per the post mortem report, injury no. 1 which was on the head of the deceased was proved fatal whereas the other injuries were found on the non vital part of the body. He submits that there has been exaggeration in naming more set of accused persons for falsely implicating them. The applicant and other co-accused persons are related to each other on account of which the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. The applicant is in jail since 14.11.2020. Lastly, it is submitted that co-accused Salahuddin and Azad Ali, having similar role, have already been granted bail by this Court vide orders dated 17.12.2020 and 14.7.2021 passed in bail application No.s 8151 of 2020 and 7019 of 2021 respectively.
3. Sri Adesh Srivastava, learned counsel appearing for the complainant submits that apart from the present case the applicant is also accused in case crime No.886 of 2020 under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 504, 506, 279, 307, 302, 120-B IPC where the brother of the deceased has also been murdered and the applicant herein is an accused in that case also.
4. Learned A.G.A. submits that the applicant has criminal history of three cases to which learned counsel for the applicant submits that he has duly explained the criminal history of the applicant in para 16 of the bail application i.e. case crime No.222 of 2018, 7 of 2018 and 886 of 2020 but in none of the cases charge sheet has been filed and there was no occasion for him to obtain bail in those cases.
5. Considering the nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tempering of the witnesses and prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case.
6. Let the applicant Kalamuddeen @ Kalaam involved in F.I.R. No. 82 of 2020 under sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 302, 504, 506, 286 I.P.C., police station Mandhata, District Pratapgarh be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two heavy sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned and the court concerned shall take an undertaking from the sureties that the properties movable/immovable which are the basis of accepting the surety, shall not be disposed of by them during the pendency of the trial with the 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 not threaten or approach the complainant in any manner whatsoever and in breach of this condition shall be a ground for cancellation of the bail in the present case.
(v) 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.
7. The trial court is directed to expedite the trial of the present case and conclude the same expeditiously preferably within a period of one year from the date of production of a certified copy of this order, if there is no legal impediment.
8. It is further directed that the identity, status and residence proof of the sureties be verified by the authorities concerned before they are accepted.
9. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the trial court will be at liberty to cancel the bail.
10. The party shall file computer generated copy of order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by it alongwith a self attested identity proof of the said person(s) (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number(s) to which the said Aadhar Card is linked, before the concerned Court/Authority/Official.
11. The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of the computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.
12. It is provided that none of the observations made above shall be considered by the trial court and the trial shall proceed on its own merits.
Order Date :- 24.8.2021 (Alok Mathur, J.) RKM.