Court No. - 78
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 39252 of 2021 Applicant :- Sabir @ Akram Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Sikandar Raza Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.
Heard Sri Sikandar Raza, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri S.B. Maurya, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the records.
This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant- Sabir @ Akram, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 1667 of 2015, under Sections 395, 396, 412 I.P.C., registered at Police Station Debrua, District Siddharth Nagar.
Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case and he is not named in the first information report. Subsequently his name surfaced in the present matter, for the first time, on 15.01.2016 in the statement of co-accused Shoyeb, after which he was shown to be arrested and from his possession a .22 rifle along with one Mangalsutra is alleged to have been recovered. It is argued that there is no proper legal identification of the said Mangalsutra to connect it with any offence.
Learned counsel for the applicant has further placed supplementary affidavit dated 22.11.2021 before the Court and has invited attention of this Court at paragraph nos. 3 to 11 of the same and has argued that the applicant is shown to be involved in other cases and after arrest of the applicant and out of which in one case being Case Crime No. 1138 of 2015, under Sections 395, 396, 412 I.P.C., P.S. Siddharth Nagar, District Siddharth Nagar, the applicant has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 17.12.2021 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 41366 of 2021, copy of the said order has been placed before the Court, which is taken on record. In the said cases the implication of the applicant is false. While placing para 12 of the said supplementary affidavit it is argued that prior to 22.02.2016, which is the date of arrest of the applicant in the present case, there is no case against him. He has further argued that even in the present case the evidence on the basis of which the applicant is being involved is inadmissible evidence in law and there is no credible evidence against the applicant. The disclosure and explanation of the other cases has been given in the supplementary affidavit in the said paragraph. The applicant is in jail since 22.02.2016 and as such has undergone around five years in jail.
Per contra learned A.G.A. for the State opposed the prayer for bail and argued that the applicant is involved in the present case and his complicity has surfaced in the matter during investigation. It is further argued that the applicant has been involved in various other cases, although the same have been disclosed and explained in the supplementary affidavit.
After having heard learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record it is evident that the applicant is not named in the F.I.R. and his implication in the present case is on the basis of disclosure of his name in the statement of the co-accused. Looking to the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence and also considering the long incarceration of the accused-applicant, this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.
Let the applicant- Sabir @ Akram, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties (one should be of his family member and the other should be of local person) 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 applicant will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever.
ii) The applicant 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 applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he 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 applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever. 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., may be issued and if 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 I.P.C.
(v) The applicant 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 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 and the trial court may proceed against him 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 applicant.
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 applicant to prison.
The bail application is allowed.
(Samit Gopal,J.) Order Date :- 24.12.2021 Naresh