Heard Sri Shailendra Pathak, learned counsel for the applicant and the learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
According to the prosecution, 6 persons including the applicant assaulted Firoz, the son of the deceased on 15.08.2020. Firoz died on account of injuries sustained by him in the said assault.
Learned counsel for applicant has contended that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. The counsel contends that as per the injury report, the deceased died due to ante mortem head injury and it is not clear as to who caused the said injury. It is further contended that there is no eye witness of the alleged incident and no incriminating article has been recovered from the possession of the applicant or at his pointing out. It has been pointed out that the co-accused Rustam Ali, Abdul Hasan, Rajendra who have been ascribed a similar role have been enlarged on bail in Bail No. 10040 of 2020, (Rustam Ali v. State), Bail No. 8958 of 2020, (Abdul Hasan v. State) and Bail No. 8090 of 2020, (Rajendra and Others v. State) respectively. The counsel contended that the applicant has no criminal history and he is languishing in jail since 18.08.2020. The charge sheet in the matter has already been submitted and there is no possibility of the applicant fleeing away from judicial custody or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail.
Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail but he could not dispute the facts as argued by the counsel for the applicant.
Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tampering 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.
Let the applicant, Yakoob Ali @ Mulla, involved in Case Crime No. 279 of 2020, under Sections 304 IPC, Police Station Khairighat, District Bahraich 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 with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-
(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he would 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 CrPC 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 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 CrPC. 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.
Order Date :- 22.1.2021 Anurag