Allowed

Niyazuddin @ Niyaz v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC1 Apr 2022BAIL/48736/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court granted bail to applicant Niyazuddin @ Niyaz in a case involving charges under Sections 498A, 304B IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, citing parity with bail granted to co-accused and lack of specific incriminating evidence against him.

What did the court decide?

Release of applicant Niyazuddin @ Niyaz on bail in the aforesaid case crime number by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Court concerned with ce

Niyazuddin @ Niyaz Vs State of U.P. — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 69

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 48736 of 2021 Applicant :- Niyazuddin @ Niyaz Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Khurshed Alam,Ashutosh Kumar Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶3

Hon'ble Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J.

¶4

Heard Shri Khurshed Alam, learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for complainant and learned A.G.A. for State. Perused the record.

¶5

The applicant has approached this Court by way of filing the present Criminal Misc. Bail Application seeking enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 0198 of 2021, under Sections 498(A), 304B and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station - Bairiya, District - Ballia after rejection of his Bail Application, vide order dated 13.9.2021 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court - I, Ballia.

¶6

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is father-in-law of deceased and in the similar circumstances, the mother-in-law of deceased - Hasmuni Khatoon @ Hasbun has been granted bail by this Court, by a reasoned order, passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.48302 of 2021, vide order dated 24.3.2022. The incident took place after one month of marriage of deceased, cause of death is asphyxia due to anti-mortem drowning, however, no other external injury was found on the person of deceased. The First Information Report was lodged after a period of more than four months and no specific role has been attributed to applicant. It is lastly submitted that applicant is also entitled for bail on the ground of parity as he is languishing in jail since 6.8.2021, there is no likelihood of early disposal of trial and the applicant undertakes that if he is enlarged on bail, he will never misuse his liberty, will not commit any offence during bail and will co-operate in the trial.

¶7

Learned A.G.A. for State as well as learned counsel for complainant have not able to make out a case contrary to the above submissions.

¶8

(A) Law on bail is well settled that 'Bail is rule and Jail is exception'. Bail should not be granted or rejected in a mechanical manner as it concerns liberty of a person. At the time of considering an application for bail, the Court must take into account certain factors such as existence of a prima facie case against the accused, gravity of the allegations, severity of punishment, position and status of the accused, likelihood of the accused fleeing from justice and repeating the offence, reasonable apprehension of tampering with the witnesses and obstructing the Courts as well as criminal antecedents of the accused.

¶9

(B) It is also well settled that the Court while considering an application for bail must not go into deep merits of the matter such as question of credibility and reliability of prosecution witnesses which can only be tested during the trial. Even ground of parity is one of the above mentioned aspects which are

¶10

essentially required to be considered.

¶11

(C) It is also well settled that the grant or refusal of bail is entirely within the discretion of the judge hearing the matter and though that discretion is unfettered, it must be exercised judiciously and in a humane manner, compassionately and not in whimsical manner. The Court should record the reasons which have weighed with the count for the exercise of its discretionary power for an order granting or rejecting bail. Conditions for the grant of bail ought not to be so strict as to be incapable of compliance, thereby making the grant of bail illusory.

¶12

Considering the rival submission, material available on record, the period of detention already undergone, the unlikelihood of early conclusion of trial, absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence, relevant factors mentioned above, particularly that co-accused has already been granted bail by this Court by a reasoned order; that no external injury was found on the person of deceased; that no specific role has been attributed to applicant and he is languishing in jail since 6.8.2021, this Court is of the view that a case of grant of bail is made out.

¶13

Let applicant - Niyazuddin @ Niyaz 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 Court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶14

i) The applicant will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the complainant in any manner whatsoever.

¶15

ii) The applicant will abide the orders of Court, will attend the Court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.

¶16

iii) The applicant 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.

¶17

iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever. 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., 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, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A I.P.C.

¶18

v) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before 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 Trial Court absence of applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for Trial Court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law and Trial Court may proceed against him under Section

¶19

229-A IPC.

¶20

The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by Court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, Court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

¶21

The bail application is allowed.

¶22

It is made clear that the observations made hereinabove are only for the purpose of adjudicating the present bail application.

¶23

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

¶24

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

¶25

It is expected from the trial court that trial of this case will be concluded expeditiously and while granting any adjournment, trial court will take note of the provisions of Section 309 Cr.P.C.

¶26

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.

¶27

Order Date :- 1.4.2022 Rishabh

¶28

[Saurabh Shyam Shamshery, J.]

¶29

Digitally signed by RISHABH KUMAR Date: 2022.04.04 09:54:02 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Niyazuddin @ Niyaz v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Niyazuddin @ Niyaz 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

Phool Singh and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ramjit and Others Vs State of U.P.

Lalluram Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shailendra Kumar Prajapati Vs State of U.P. and Another

Karuwa and Another Vs State of U.P.

Devendra and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another