Allowed

Mumirul Islam @ Umar v. State of Up and Another

Allahabad HC3 Sept 2021CRLA/2813/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed the criminal appeal against the bail rejection order under the SC/ST Act. Finding the appellant's role secondary and prima facie case appealing, the Court released him on bail with strict conditions regarding trial cooperation and presence.

What did the court decide?

The impugned bail rejection order of 30.09.2020 was set aside; the appellant was released on bail with personal bond, two sureties, and specific conditions of cooperation with the trial.

Mumirul Islam @ Umar Vs State of Up and Another — Caste Atrocities | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 67

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 2813 of 2020

¶3

Appellant :- Mumirul Islam @ Umar Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Syed Ali Imam,Abhilasha Singh,Ashutosh Yadav

¶4

Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Manoj Kumar

¶5

Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Ashutosh Yadav, learned counsel for the appellant, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 as well as learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.

¶7

This criminal appeal under Section 14 A (2) of Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (in short "S.C./S.T. Act") has been filed for setting-aside the bail rejection order dated 30.09.2020 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Ghaziabad in Bail Application No.4609 of 2020 in Case Crime No. 1439 of 2020, under Sections 302, 201, 34 IPC and Section 3(2)(V) of SC/ST Act, Police Station-Indirapuram, District-Ghaziabad.

¶8

Pursuant to my earlier order dated 31.08.2021 which has duly communicated to learned counsel for the opposite party no.2, secondly today the case is listed peremptorily.

¶9

Despite of this none has appeared representing the opposite party no.2.

¶10

With the aid and help of learned AGA, the Court is proposing to decide this appeal on merits.

¶11

Learned AGA submits that he has already filed counter affidavit, which is on record.

¶12

Learned counsel for the appellant has declined to file any rejoinder affidavit to the counter affidavit filed by the State and wants to address the Court on merits.

¶13

Submission made by the learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant is not named in the FIR and the entire tirade of allegation is against the main accused Mustafa. The name of the applicant has figured up in the confessional statement of Mustafa, in which he has stated that after killing the deceased with the help and aid of appellant, he has thrown the dead body of the deceased into the canal. Learned counsel for the appellant further submitted that at best role attributed to the appellant is of Section 201 IPC. The appellant has got no criminal antecedent to his credit neither any incriminating material was recovered from his possession of is pointing out. The appellant is languishing in jail since 11.08.2020.

¶14

Learned A.G.A as well as learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 opposed the prayer for bail.

¶15

The submission made by learned counsel for the appellant, prima facie, is quite appealing and convincing for the purpose of bail only.

¶16

Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, taking into account the manner and mode in which the appellant has been summoned and the period of detention already undergone, and also without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I am of the view that the appellant has made out a case for bail.

¶17

Let the appellant-Mumirul Islam @ Umar, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable 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:-

¶18

(i) THE APPELLANT WOULD FULLY COOPERATE IN THE CONCLUSION OF TRIAL WITHIN ONE YEAR AND ANY TEMPERING OR WILLING TACTICS ON THE PART OF THE APPELLANT TO DELAY THE TRIAL WOULD WARRANT THE AUTOMATIC CANCELLATION OF BAIL.

¶19

(ii) THE APPELLANT 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.

¶20

(iii) THE APPELLANT 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.

¶21

(iv) IN CASE, THE APPELLANT MISUSE 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 APPELLANT 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.

¶22

(v) THE APPELLANT 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 APPELLANT 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.

¶23

However, it is made clear that any wilful violation of above conditions by the appellant, shall have serious repercussion on his bail so granted by this court.

¶24

Accordingly, the appeal succeeds and the same stands allowed. Impugned order dated order dated 30.09.2020 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Ghaziabad, is hereby set aside.

¶25

Order Date :- 3.9.2021 Abhishek Sri.

Mumirul Islam @ Umar v. State of Up and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mumirul Islam @ Umar v. State of Up and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sanjay Singh and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Uday Pratap Sharma Vs State of U.P.

Tarun @ Pinta Vs State of U.P. and Another

Veermati Vs State of Up and Another

Arvind Vs State of U.P. and Another

Jalish Vs State of U.P.