Single judge granted bail to the applicant in a criminal case involving affray and attempt to murder, citing reasonable apprehension of witness tampering and severity of punishment under Article 21.
Released on bail with personal bond and two sureties, subject to conditions of cooperation and non-tampering with evidence.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 55
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 31283 of 2018
Applicant :- Amaruddin Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Amit Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Piyush Kumar Shukla,Sudhir Kumar,Sudhir Kumar Tiwari
Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.
Heard Sri A.K.Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri S.K.Tiwari, learned counsel for the complainant and Sri S.S.Tiwari, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State.
According to the prosecution version the complainant lodged FIR against seven persons including the applicant alleging that all the accused persons assaulted the cousin of the complainant by their respective weapons of assault i.e gun and country made pistol causing injuries to him,
Learned counsel for the applicant in support of his prayer for bail submits that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case due to old enmity and village Party- bandi and he has committed no offence. It is next contended that the role of assault has been assigned to coaccused Gudda @Afroz and Munna @ Ashik and no specific role is attributed to the applicant. Nothing has been recovered from the possession of the applicant. The alleged eye witnesses namely namely Ashok Kumar and Naseer Ahmad did not disclose the name of the applicant in their statement recorded under section 161 Cr.P.C. The injured was admitted in the hospital on 10.4.2018 and discharged on 18.4.2018. It is alleged that the applicant was carrying lathi in his hand, but he did not cause any injury to the injured. The applicant is an old man aged about 70 years and suffering from several ailments as such the presence of the applicant on the sport is highly doubtful.There is no independent witness to support the prosecution version. Co-accused Saleem @ Jannat Ali has been granted bail by the court below as stated in paragraph 21 of the affidavit filed in support of the bail application. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused has also been touched upon at length. It has been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required. It has also been submitted that the applicant
is languishing in jail since 21.7.2018. The applicant has no other reported criminal antecedent.
Learned counsel for the complainant and learned A.G.A. have vehemently opposed the prayer.
Considering the nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tempering of the witnesses and prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge and reformative theory of punishment, and also considering the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh v. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case let the applicant Amaruddin involved in Case Crime No. 201 of 2018, under Sections 147, 148, 307, 120-B, 34 I.P.C, P.S. Bhojipura, District- Bareilly be released on bail on hisr furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:
(i) The applicant will co-operate with the trail and remain present personally on each and every date fixed after release.
(ii) The applicant will not tamper with the prosecution evidence and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.
(iii) The applicant will not indulge in any unlawful activities.
(iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever.
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.
Order Date :- 10.9.2018 IA
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to release on bail in a case involving charges of affray, attempt to murder, and common intention despite severity of punishment and prima facie satisfaction of the c
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Dataram Singh v. State of U.P. and anotherApplied¶10
Dataram Singh v. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 · Who else cites this
3 provisions across 3 enactments
Amaruddin
State Of U.P.
Vivek Kumar Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
Vivek Kumar Singh
Parties & counsel
