Court No. - 52
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 16004 of 2021 Applicant :- Nijamuddin @ Chunnu And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Ramesh Chandra Yadav,Pradeep Kumar Rai,Prakhar Saran Srivastava,Preeti Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Manjeet Kumar,Pramod Kumar Maurya
Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.
Heard Sri Ramesh Chandra Yadav, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Manjeet Kumar, learned counsel for the first informant, Sri Satish Kumar Singh, learned AGA for the State and perused the material on record.
Learned counsel for the first informant has filed counter affidavit today in Court, which is taken on record.
Learned counsel for the applicant states that he does not intend to file any rejoinder to the same.
This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicants Nijamuddin@Chunnu, Kamaluddin @ Kallu and Bablu @ Shamshad Ali, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 0007 of 2021, under Section(s) 34/302/341/504 I.P.C. and 4/25 Arms Act, registered at P.S. Nonahara, District- Ghazipur.
Learned counsel for the applicants argued that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the present case. It is argued that as per the F.I.R. lodged by Sakeel, the father of the deceased Rasid, the applicants have been assigned the role of catching hold of the deceased Rasid whereas the role of assaulting him with knife has been assigned to co-accused Shahbaz. It is argued that subsequently in the statements recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. of the first informant, Salma the wife of the first informant, Sakir the son of the first informant and Jakir Hussain, the same version has been reiterated. It is argued that later on 11.2.2021 Mohd. Akeel Khan was interrogated who for the first time stated that all the accused persons assaulted the deceased but has clarified the role of using knife to co-accused Shahbaz.
It is argued that occurrence in the present matter is of 08.1.2021 and the F.I.R. was registered on the same day but the said statement has been recorded after one month and two days of the incident. It is further argued that later on in the second statement of Smt.Salma the wife of the first informant, she has improved the version of the prosecution and has stated that all the accused persons being the applicants and the co-accused Shahbaz assaulted the deceased with knife. It is argued that the same is an afterthought and an improvement in the case just in order to give a different colour after looking to the post mortem examination report to falsely implicate the applicants. Learned counsel has argued that on the pointing out of co-accused Shahbaz a knife has been recovered by the police for which recovery memo has been placed before the Court, which is at page-29 of the affidavit.
It is argued that the role of the applicants as per the F.I.R. is distinguishable with that of co-accused Shahbaz. Learned counsel has placed before the Court the post mortem report of the deceased and has argued that the deceased has received injuries having sharp edged and stabbed wound which are suggestive of the use of a knife. It is further argued that the applicants have no motive to commit the aforesaid offence. The dispute was between the deceased and the co-accused Shahbaz as per prosecution case. It is argued that the applicants have no other criminal antecedents as stated in para-17 of the affidavit and are in jail since 10.1.2021 and 15.1.2021.
Per contra, learned counsel for the first informant and learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail. It is argued that the applicants are involved in the present case and have been assigned the role of catching hold of the deceased. It is argued that as such implication of the applicants is there.
After having heard learned counsels for the parties and perusing the record, it is apparent that the role of the applicants is distinguishable with the co-accused Shahbaz who has been stated to have used a knife for assault upon the deceased. The applicants have been assigned the role of catching hold of the deceased.
Looking to the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence, this Court is of the view that the applicants may be enlarged on bail.
Let the applicants- Nijamuddin@Chunnu, Kamaluddin@Kallu and Bablu@Shamshad Ali, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on their furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-
i) The applicants will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever.
ii) The applicants will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.
(iii) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they shall not seek any adjournment on the date 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.
(iv) The applicants will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever. In case, the applicants misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence proclamation under section 82 Cr.P.C., may be issued and if applicants 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 I.P.C.
(V) The applicants shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicants 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 and the trial court may proceed against them under Section 229- A IPC.
(vi) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the applicants.
The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicants to prison.
The bail application is allowed.
The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.
The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.
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.
Order Date :- 27.7.2021 Naresh (Samit Gopal,J.)