Allowed

Shahnawaj v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC7 Jul 2021BAIL/12174/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed a bail application by the applicant, Shahnawaj, who was a jailer in a case involving dowry and POCSO charges. Granting bail based on a settlement between parties, the Court imposed standard and additional conditions for his release.

What did the court decide?

The applicant was released on bail on execution of a personal bond and two sureties upon satisfying the Court.

Shahnawaj Vs State of U.P. and Another — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 67 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12174 of 2021

¶2

Applicant :- Shahnawaj Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Sunil Kumar Singh,Mahendra Pratap,Mohd. Arshad,Shyam Shankar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Prakash Chand Srivastava

¶3

Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.

¶4

Heard Sri Rakesh Dubey and Sri Shyam Shankar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Prakash Chand Srivastava, learned counsel for the complainant, learned AGA and perused the record.

¶5

By means of this application, the applicant who is involved in case crime no. 200 of 2020, under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 354 IPC, Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act and 9/10 POCSO Act, P.S. Mahila Thana, District- Ghaziabad is seeking enlargement on bail during the trial.

¶6

Learned counsel for the applicant in support of his application for bail submits that the applicant is innocent. He has been falsely implicated. At the outset, Sri Rakesh Dubey, learned counsel for the applicant has drawn the attention of the Court to an affidavit sworned by Smt. Heena Khan, opposite party no. 2 dated 04.12.2020 which is annexed as annexure no. 9 to the petition. It is further contended that the basic thrust of the allegation, is dowry related harassment qua her by the applicant but by annexure no. 9 both the parties have settled their dispute amicably and the wife does not want to pursue the present criminal case against her husband anymore. It is further contended that the remaining allegation with regard to the POCSO Act was added just to give more serious and grim look to the allegation but fact remains that the parties are come to terms. The endeavor of the Court is not to disturb the settlement between the parties. It has lastly been submitted that the applicant is in jail since 19.01.2021 having no criminal antecedents except the present one.

¶7

Learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts and the legal submissions as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶8

The submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant, prima facie, quite appealing and convincing for the purpose of bail only.

¶9

Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a fit case for bail.

¶10

Let the applicant Shahnawaj , be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on 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:-

¶11

(i) THE APPLICANT SHALL FILE AN UNDERTAKING TO THE EFFECT THAT HE/SHE 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.

¶12

(ii) THE APPLICANT SHALL REMAIN PRESENT BEFORE THE TRIAL COURT ON EACH DATE FIXED, EITHER PERSONALLY OR THROUGH HIS/HER COUNSEL. IN CASE OF HIS/HER ABSENCE, WITHOUT SUFFICIENT CAUSE, THE TRIAL COURT MAY PROCEED AGAINST HIM/HER UNDER SECTION 229-A IPC.

¶13

(iii) IN CASE, THE APPLICANT MISUSES THE LIBERTY OF BAIL DURING TRIAL AND IN ORDER TO SECURE HIS/HER 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/HER, IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, UNDER SECTION 174-A IPC.

¶14

(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

¶15

OF BAIL AND PROCEED AGAINST THE HIM/HER IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW.

¶16

(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.

¶17

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶18

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.

¶19

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-:

¶20

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.

¶21

The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.

¶22

The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.

¶23

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.

¶24

However, it is made clear that any wilful violation of above conditions by the applicant, shall have serious repercussion on his/her bail so granted by this court and the trial court is at liberty to cancel the bail, after recording the reasons for doing so, in the given case of any of the condition mentioned above.

¶25

Order Date :- 7.7.2021 Nisha

Shahnawaj v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shahnawaj v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Avne @ Avnish Vs State of U.P. and Another

Santosh Kumar Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Deepak Sahani Vs State of U.P.

Ankush Khateek Vs State of U.P.

Sherkhan Vs State of U.P.

Rajan Singh Vs State of U.P.