Allowed

Raju @ Naushad v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC23 Nov 2022BAIL/41244/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal Misc. Bail Application allowed. The Court granted bail to the applicant, Raju @ Naushad, in a case involving assault and mischief, holding that the matter was a fit case considering the bail granted to identically circumstanced co-accused and the dictum of the Apex Court in Dataram Singh (2018).

What did the court decide?

Release on personal bond and two sureties subject to specific conditions including attendance, no tampering with evidence, and no repetition of crimes.

Raju @ Naushad Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 93

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 41244 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Raju @ Naushad Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Chandra Prakash Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Irfanul Huda

¶4

Hon'ble Surendra Singh-I,J.

¶5

Copy of the bail orders dated 19.10.2022, 17.10.2022 and 17.10.2022 relating to co-accused persons, namely, Chandu @ Ansar, Mosin @ Mohsin and Mursaleen, passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 41036 of 2022, 46025 of 2022 and 45757 of 2022 respectively has been produced by the learned counsel for the applicant in the Court today which is taken on record.

¶6

Heard Sri Dharmendra Kumar Patel, Advocate, holding brief of Sri Chandra Prakash Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Laxman Prasad, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.

¶7

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Raju @ Naushad, with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 38 of 2021, registered under Sections 323, 504, 436, 429, 506, 325 I.P.C., Police StationThathiya, District- Kannauj, during pendency of trial.

¶8

There is allegation in the first information report dated 11.02.2021 lodged by informant, Tabassum, against four named including applicant-accused, Raju @ Naushad and 3-4 unknown accused persons that her marriage was solemnized five years before with Mohsin, son of Nasir Khan, resident of Mohabbatpur, P.S.- Thathiya, DistrictKannauj, and has a daughter born out of their wedlock. Due to bad behaviour of her husband, Mohsin, a case is pending in the court in which the court has ordered a maintenance of Rs.5,000/- per month to be given to the informant. On account of aforesaid, the informant's husband, Mohsin, brother-in-law, Chandu alias Ansar ( jeth ), the applicant and Mursaleen Khan along with 3-4 unnamed accused with common intention barged into informant's house at 1.30 a.m. and abused and beat the informant with fists and kicks. When her aunt, Gudiya came to her rescue, she was also beaten with fists and kicks. The accused set the roof on fire resulting in death of one goat of the informant. The informant identified the named accused persons in the electricity light.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is next submitted that the incident took place in the night and hence, without proper identification,

¶10

the Investigating OfÏcer has submitted charge-sheet against the applicant. It is further submitted that identically circumstanced co-accused persons, namely, Chandu @ Ansar, Mosin @ Mohsin and Mursaleen, have been enlarged on bail by coordinate Bench of this Court vide orders dated 19.10.2022, 17.10.2022 and 17.10.2022 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 41036 of 2022, 46025 of 2022 and 45757 of 2022 respectively. The case of the applicant stands on identical footing and the applicant is also entitled to bail on the ground of parity. The applicant is languishing in jail since 25.08.2022 and has no criminal history to his credit. In case the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty.

¶11

Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, he does not deserve any indulgence. However, he could not deny the submissions made on behalf of the applicant.

¶12

Considering the material/evidence brought on record, the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, the nature of allegations, the gravity of offence, the fact that identically circumstanced co-accused persons, namely, Chandu @ Ansar, Mosin @ Mohsin and Mursaleen, have been enlarged on bail by coordinate Benches of this Court, larger mandate of Article 21 of the Constitution of India, as well as the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 , the Court finds it to be a fit case for bail.

¶13

The bail application, accordingly, stands allowed.

¶14

Let the applicant, Raju @ Naushad, involved in the aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions:-

¶15

The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.

¶16

The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

¶17

The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶18

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 sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229A of the Indian Penal Code;

¶19

In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail 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.

¶20

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 default of this condition is deliberate or without sufÏcient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶21

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

¶22

Order Date :- 23.11.2022 KS

¶23

Digitally signed by KISHAN SINHA Date: 2022.11.23 18:33:58 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Raju @ Naushad v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raju @ Naushad 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Moharram Ali Vs State of U.P.

Anjali Dhan Vs State of U.P.

Shoeab Vs State of U.P.

Rakesh Singh Vs State of U.P.

Anjesh Vs State of U.P.

Tarun @ Arun Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others