Partly allowed

Haroon v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC5 May 2022BAIL/46554/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court disposed of four criminal bail applications regarding a violent assault resulting in death and injuries. While Zeeshan and Sadique were denied bail due to strong evidence, Haroon and Fasad were granted bail subject to strict conditions including attending specific trial sessions and maintaining a no-adjournment policy. The order differentiated outcomes despite the applicants being co-acc

What did the court decide?

Bail allowed for Haroon and Fasad on bond and sureties with strict conditions; bail rejected for Zeeshan and Sadique.

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

¶1

Court No. - 66

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 46554 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Haroon Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rajeev Kumar Singh Parmar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Suresh Dhar Dwivedi

¶4

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 46008 of 2021

¶5

Applicant :- Fasad Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rajeev Kumar Singh Parmar,Om Narayan Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Suresh Dhar Dwivedi

¶6

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 46224 of 2021

¶7

Applicant :- Zeeshan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rajeev Kumar Singh Parmar,Om Narayan Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Suresh Dhar Dwivedi

¶8

¶9

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 46416 of 2021

¶10

Applicant :- Sadique Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rajeev Kumar Singh Parmar,Ashwani Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Suresh Dhar Dwivedi

¶11

Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.

¶12

Heard Mr. Rajeev Kumar Singh Parmar along with Om Narain Pandey and Mr. Ashish Kumar, learned counsel for applicants Haroon, Fasad, Zeeshan and Saqique learned A.G.A. for State and Mr. Suresh Dhar Dwivedi, learned counsel for first informant.

¶13

These applications for bail have been filed by applicants Haroon, Fasad, Zeeshan and Saqique seeking their enlargement

¶14

on bail in Case Crime No.477 of 2021, under Sections 147, 148, 323, 504, 506, 452, 304 IPC, P.S. Roza, District Shahjahanpur, during the pendency of trial.

¶15

Perused the record.

¶16

Record shows that in respect of an incident, which is alleged to have occurred on 8.8.2021, a delayed F.I.R. dated 9.8.2021 was lodged by first informant Firasat Ali and was registered as Case Crime No.477 of 2021, under Sections 147, 148, 323, 504, 506, 452, 304 IPC, P.S. Roza, District Shahjahanpur. In the aforesaid F.I.R., six persons namely; Zeeshan, Sadique, Fasad, Nahid, Haroon and Rahmat have been nominated as named accused.

¶17

The gravamen of the allegations made in the F.I.R. is to the effect that after loosing the election for the post of Pradhan, named accused maintained enmity with first informant. On account of above, on 8.8.2021 at around 6 p.m., named accused with a common object armed with lathis and dandas came in front of the house of the first informant and thereafter, assaulted the brothers of first informant namely, Riyasat and Guddu. Injured Riyasat and Guddu were taken to District Hospital, Shahjahanpur. However, during course of treatment, injured Riyasat succumbed to the injuries sustained by him.

¶18

After lodging of aforementioned F.I.R., Investigating Officer proceeded with statutory investigation of concerned case crime number in terms of Chapter XII Cr. P. C. The injured Guddu was medically examined. His Medico Legal Report is at page 60 of the bail application of applicant Haroon. As per said injury report, the injured Guddu sustained following injuries:-

¶19

L.W. 4 x 0.5 cm. bone deep over right side of skull, 9 cm. above Rt ear, margin irregular Red clotted blood present. X-ray.

¶20

Right ear bleeding present refer to ENT for opinion.

¶21

Opinion :- Injury No.1 KUO X-ray advice other injury.

¶22

Simple in nature caused by hand and blunt object clot fresh bleed present.

¶23

The inquest (panchayatnama) of the body of the deceased Riyasat was conducted on 09.08.2021. In the opinion of witnesses of inquest (panch witnesses), the nature of death of deceased was characterized as homicidal. Thereafter, the post mortem of the body of the deceased was conducted on 09.08.2021. In the opinion of Autopsy Surgeon, the cause of death of deceased was coma as a result of ante mortem head

¶24

injury. The Autopsy Surgeon found following ante mortem injuries on the body of the deceased:-

¶25

Stich wound 4.5 cm. on Rt side of head 5 cm. above Rt ear on opening x bone deep no. of stiches 05.

¶26

L.W. 4.5 cm. x 1.5 cm. x bone deep on Rt side of forehead 05 cm. above Rt. eye brow.

¶27

Contusion with swelling 8 cm. x 2 cm. on Lt Eye.

¶28

L.W. 4 cm. x 1.5 cm. x muscle deep on posterior aspect of Lt arm 12 cm. below Lt. elbow.

¶29

Multiple contusion present on Rt. side of chest horizontal placed in area of 38 cm. x 12 cm. varying sizes 16 cm. x 4 cm. to smallest 6 cm. x 3 cm. five in number.

¶30

Contusion 2 cm. x 1.5 cm. on anterior aspect of Lt. forearm 9 cm. above Lt wrist joint abraded contusion 2 cm. x 1.5 cm. on Rt. elbow.

¶31

Contusion 14 cm. x 9 cm. on Rt. arm 7 cm. below Rt. tip of shoulder.

¶32

Contusion 11 cm. x 3 cm. on Lt. side back of chest 7 cm. below Lt. angle of scapula.

¶33

Abrasion 4 cm. x 3 cm. Rt. knee.

¶34

Abrasion 5 cm. x 2 cm. on Rt. leg 15 cm. below Rt knee.

¶35

Abraded contusion 4 cm. x 2 cm. on Lt. leg 6 cm. below Lt. knee joint.

¶36

During course of investigation, Investigating Officer examined the first informant Firasat Ali, injured Guddu as well as the eyewitnesses i.e. Hirasad, Nizakat, Nijmun Nisha, Taskeena and Washid of the occurrence. On the basis of above as well as other material collected by Investigating Officer during course of investigation, he came to the conclusion that complicity of some of the named accused is established in the crime in question. Accordingly, Investigating Officer upon completion of investigation submitted the charge-sheet dated 29.09.2021, whereby only four of the named accused i.e. applicants herein have been charge-sheeted under Sections 323, 504, 506, 452, 304, 336 IPC.

¶37

Learned counsel for applicants contends that though applicants are named as well as charge sheeted accused, but they are

¶38

innocent. Applicants have been falsely implicated in aforementioned case crime number on account of political enmity. It is thus contended that in occurrence giving rise to present applications for bail, one person has sustained injuries, whereas another has died. All the injuries sustained by the injured as well as the deceased can be said to have been caused by hard and blunt objects. However, the role of causing the fatal/grievous injury sustained by the deceased as well as the injured have not been specified in the F.I.R. It is thus contended that common and general role has been assigned to all accused. It is also contended that occurrence has taken place at the spur of the moment. From the statements of the witnesses examined under Section 161 Cr.P.C., it cannot be inferred that there was pre-meditative mind to commit the crime in question. It is lastly contended that applicants are men of clean antecedents, inasmuch they have no criminal history to their credit except the present one. Applicants are in jail since 10.08.2021. As such, they have undergone near about a period of eight months of incarceration. In case, applicants are enlarged on bail, they shall not misuse liberty of bail and shall co-operate with the trial.

¶39

Per contra, the learned A.G.A. and the learned counsel for first informant have opposed these applications for bail. They submit that since applicants are named as well as charge-sheeted accused, they therefore, do not deserve any indulgence by this Court. It is then contended that in the F.I.R. giving rise to these applications for bail, six persons have been nominated as named accused. However, the charge-sheet has been submitted only against four of the named accused i.e. applicants herein. In the occurrence giving rise to present criminal proceedings, there is one injured as well as one deceased. The injured in his statement has supported the prosecution story as unfolded in the F.I.R. Similarly the other eye-witnesses namely; Hirasad, Nizakat, Nijmun Nisha, Taskeena and Washid have also supported the prosecution witnesses. In short, the submission is that the ocular version stands corroborated by the medical evidence on record. Recovery of the weapon of assault i.e. Danda has been made from named accused Sadique and Zeeshan on their pointing out. The said recovery cannot be said to be false. The deceased has sustained head injury, which could have been caused by the weapon of assault recovered. On the aforesaid premise, they contended that no indulgence be granted by this Court in favour of applicants and thebail applications be rejected.

¶40

Having heard learned counsel for applicants, learned A.G.A. for State, learned counsel for first informant, upon perusal of record and keeping in view the nature of offence, evidence, complicity

¶41

of accused and accusations made but without expressing any opinion on the merits of case, no good or justifiable ground has been made out for enlarging the applicants Sadique and Zeeshan on bail. Accordingly the bail applications of applicants Sadique and Zeeshan are rejected .

¶42

However, for the facts and reasons mentioned above, coaccused namely; Haroon and Fasad has made out a case for bail. Accordingly, bail applications of Haroon and Fasad are allowed .

¶43

Let the applicants, Haroon and Fasad be released on bail in aforesaid case crime number on their furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶44

(i) THE APPLICANTS SHALL FILE AN UNDERTAKING TO THE EFFECT THAT THEY 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.

¶45

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

¶46

(iii) IN CASE, THE APPLICANTS MISUSES THE LIBERTY OF BAIL DURING TRIAL AND IN ORDER TO SECURE THEIR PRESENCE PROCLAMATION UNDER SECTION 82 CR.P.C., MAY BE ISSUED AND IF APPLICANTS FAIL TO APPEAR BEFORE THE COURT ON THE DATE FIXED IN SUCH PROCLAMATION, THEN, THE TRIAL COURT SHALL INITIATE PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THEM, IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, UNDER SECTION 174-A IPC.

¶47

(iv) THE APPLICANTS 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 APPLICANTS IS DELIBERATE OR WITHOUT SUFFICIENT CAUSE, THEN IT SHALL BE

¶48

OPEN FOR THE TRIAL COURT TO TREAT SUCH DEFAULT AS ABUSE OF LIBERTY OF BAIL AND PROCEED AGAINST THEM IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW.

¶49

(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 APPLICANTS.

¶50

However, it is made clear that any wilful violation of above conditions by applicantS, shall have serious repercussion on their 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 condition mentioned above.

¶51

Order Date :- 5.5.2022

¶52

Zafar

¶53

Digitally signed by MOHAMMAD ZAFAR ANSARI Date: 2022.05.12 11:18:39 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Haroon v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Haroon 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

Ashish Pasi Vs State of U.P. and Another

Mukesh Vs State of U.P.

Ali Bhejan @ Javed Vs State of U.P.

Anuj Vs State of U.P.

Akash and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Imran Vs State of U.P.