This order allows a bail application in a criminal case involving serious injury. The court considers the severity of the charge and detention duration, granting bail subject to personal bond, sureties, and specific court conduct conditions.
Release on bail by furnishing personal bond and two reliable sureties.
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. - 71
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2696 of 2020
Applicant :- Mohd. Waris Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mohd. Abrar Khan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajendra Kumar-IV,J.
Heard learned Counsel for applicant, learned AGA for State and perused the material available on record.
Accused-applicant, involved in Case Crime No.155 of 2019, under Sections 307, 504 and 506 IPC, Police Station Khuldabad, District Prayagraj (Allahabad), applied for bail.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to enmity. Applicant is not named in the FIR. He has committed no offence. Prosecution story is false and fake. Informant is himself injured in the case but he did not name the applicant in the FIR. Name of applicant came into light for the first time in the statement of victim during investigation but it is not clear from his statement how he knew the name of applicant. There is no independent witness of the incident whereas incident is said to have taken in public place and Police has arrayed three persons. Name of witness Sarfaraz does not find place in FIR but during investigation his statement was recorded as eye witness after lapse of more than two months. Applicant is in jail since 20.11.2019. It is further submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant's fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses. In case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail. Due to heavy pendency of cases in the Court, there is no possibility of early conclusion of the trial.
Learned has opposed the prayer for bail but did not dispute the factual submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant and submitted that accused as well as co-accused opened fire upon the victim causing serious injuries which is on the abdomen of victim.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, rival contention of learned counsel for the parties, detention of applicant in jail, severity of punishment in case of conviction, role of accused and without commenting upon the merit of the case, applicant deserves bail.
Accordingly, bail application is allowed.
Let applicant Mohd. Waris be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties and filing an undertaking to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions:-
In breach of any condition enumerated above, Trial Court shall be at liberty to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.
However, it is provided that Trial Court shall proceed the trial in view of Section 309 Cr.P.C., expedite and conclude the trial within one year from the date of production of certified copy of this order without granting any unnecessary adjournment, if there is no legal impediment.
Order Date :- 21.1.2020 I.A.Siddiqui
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant deserves bail considering the severity of punishment and stage of trial.
Whether the accused can be enlarged on bail on furnishing sureties and undertaking conditions.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Mohd. Waris
Rajendra Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
