Court No. - 67
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 23024 of 2021 Applicant :- Samir Ahmad @ Sonu Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Chandra Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.
Counter affidavit filed by learned A.G.A through e-mode today in the Court is taken on record. Learned counsel for the applicant does not propose to file any rejoinder affidavit and wants to argue the case on merit.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.
By means of this application, the applicant who is involved in case crime no.261 of 2020, under Section 307 IPC, Police Station-Syana, District-Bulandshahr is seeking enlargement on bail during the trial.
Submission made by learned counsel for the applicant is that for the incident of 15.07.2020, around 22:00 hours, the FIR was got registered on the next day on 16.07.2020 at 02:51 p.m. by Tahir Aziz against the applicant and two others with the allegation that his son has tried to pacify the situation between Sonu@Samir and Sonu@Zishan who were quarrelling at the open place. All of a sudden, the present applicant Sonu@Samir gave gun shot over the face of the injured.
Contention raised is that the applicant has got no mental element or mens rea to commit this offence. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that it is just possible that in the heated passion, it has caused accidental fire as there is only singular gun shot over the person. Secondly, it was contended that though, the seat of injury is the left side of the face, but the measurement is 2 cm x 0.75 cm into bone deep, with a minuscule dimension. Had there been any intention to eliminate, there would have been a repeated fire and seems to be accidental in nature. The applicant is languishing in jail since 27.07.2020 of which the charge sheet was submitted on 28.09.2020. The trial of the case has not even been commenced and it would take much of the time to conclude the same. The applicant has got absolutely clean past having no criminal antecedent.
Per contra, learned A.G.A opposed the prayer for bail by making a mention that there is direct testimony of the injured attributing the general role of firing upon the applicant himself, then the mental element occupies the back seat.
Considering the rival submissions of the parties, it is true that the applicant is the author of this incident but the Court cannot shut eyes that the applicant is languishing in jail for more than one year and three months with no progress in the trial coupled with the fact that there is singular injury which may be accidental in nature.
Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail.
Let the applicant, Samir Ahmad @ Sonu, who is involved in the aforesaid case be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.
(i) 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.
(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 IPC.
(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., 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 IPC.
(iv) 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.
(v) THE TRIAL COURT MAY MAKE ALL POSSIBLE EFFORTS/ENDEAVOUR AND TRY TO CONCLUDE THE TRIAL WITHIN A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR AFTER THE RELEASE OF THE APPLICANT.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.
Since the bail application has been decided under extra-ordinary circumstances, thus in the interest of justice following additional conditions are being imposed just to facilitate the applicant to be released on bail forthwith. Needless to mention that these additional conditions are imposed to cope with emergent condition-:
1. The applicant shall be enlarged on bail on execution of personal bond without sureties till normal functioning of the courts is restored. The accused will furnish sureties to the satisfaction of the court below within a month after normal functioning of the courts are restored.
2. The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.
3. The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.
4. 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 :- 26.10.2021 Sumit S Digitally signed by RAHUL CHATURVEDI Date: 2021.10.27 10:57:13 IST Reason: Document Owner Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad