Allowed

Mohammad Kasim v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC7 Feb 2022BAIL/2824/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal bail application concerning offences under Sections 498-A IPC and D.P. Act arising from a matrimonial dispute, the court granted bail to the applicant. Conditions included attending trial dates and specific restrictions on seeking adjournments.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail on furnishing personal bond and two reliable sureties subject to strict conditions regarding attendance and conduct.

Mohammad Kasim Vs State of U.P. — Matrimonial and Divorce | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 44

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2824 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Mohammad Kasim Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Saurabh Tripathi,Shantanu Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶6

The applicant is seeking enlargement on bail in case crime No. 170 of 2021, under Sections 498-A, 313, 323, 504, 506 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Badhapur, District Bijnor.

¶7

The contention is that applicant is husband who has no criminal history and has been falsely implicated only because of matrimonial dispute with his wife. It is stated that his wife was living with her mother and the plea that she was taken to the house of the applicant on 01.07.2021 or some medicine was administered to her which resulted in foetus getting aborted is not substantiated, in as much as, it is neither disclosed as to on which date the abortion took place nor the details of the hospital etc. is provided. It is also urged that statement of doctor has been recorded in proceedings under section 161 Cr.P.C who had attended the victim, as per whom, an ultrasound was performed and there were medical complications which may have resulted in abortion. It is stated that chargesheet has already been filed and the applicant shall co-operate in the course of trial. It is further stated that applicant is in jail since 25.11.2021 and there is no possibility of early conclusion of trial on account of the ongoing pandemic COVID-19.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant, but could not point out anything material to the contrary.

¶9

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as also the submissions made, without commenting upon merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶10

Let applicant Mohammad Kasim be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following additional conditions, which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶11

(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.

¶12

(ii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall 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.

¶13

(iii) 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.

¶14

(iv) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. 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.

¶15

(v) 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 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 of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶16

Order Date :- 7.2.2022 Madhurima

¶17

Digitally signed by MADHURIMA GARG Date: 2022.02.09 12:57:27 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Mohammad Kasim v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohammad Kasim v. State of U.P.

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

Jasveer Kaur Vs State of U.P.

Rohit Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Arjun Singh Khatik Vs State of U.P.

Subhan Ansari Vs State of U.P.

Vinay Kumar Gupta Vs State of U.P.

Mukesh Yadav Vs State of U.P.