Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2021
  6. /
  7. January

: Mujaffar Alam vs State Of U P

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|30 July, 2021
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 66
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 24142 of 2021 Applicant : Mujaffar Alam Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Chandra Prakash Misra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Vinay Kumar Jaiswal
Hon'ble Ali Zamin,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No.86 of 2021, under Sections 392, 411 I.P.C., Police Station Vishunpura, District Kushinagar.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that according to the FIR version on 4.5.2021, Rs.40,000/- was looted by two unknown persons. He further submits that applicant is not named in the FIR. It is alleged that on 24.5.2021 applicant and co-accused were arrested by the police by showing the recovery of Rs.8,100/- from the possession of the applicant and Rs.6,400/- from the possession of the co-accused Saheb Hussain. He further submits that name of the applicant surfaced in the confessional statement of the co-accused. He next submits that there is no criminal history against the applicant. He further submits that there is no independent witness of the alleged recovery. He further submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. There is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses and, in case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail. It is next submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 25.5.2021.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant by contending that there is no reason to falsely implicate the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve any benevolence.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, applicant not named in the FIR and recovery made after 20 days of the incident, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, the applicant is entitled for bail, let the applicant Mujaffar Alam involved in the aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions :-
(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence and pressurize the witnesses during trial.
(ii) 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.
(iii) 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.
(iv) 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, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(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.
The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.
The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
Order Date :- 30.7.2021 m.a.
Digitally signed by Justice Ali Zamin Date: 2021.08.02 14:08:04 IST Reason: Document Owner Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

: Mujaffar Alam vs State Of U P

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
30 July, 2021
Judges
  • Ali Zamin
Advocates
  • Chandra Prakash Misra