Allowed

Amzad v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC21 Nov 2022BAIL/51290/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court allowed a criminal bail application filed by Amzad under charges including Sections 34/307 IPC. Considering the applicant's role as a driver and lack of witness evidence against him, bail was granted with personal bond and sureties and specific attendance conditions.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to specified conditions.

Amzad Vs State of U.P. — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 90 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 51290 of 2022 Applicant :- Amzad Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ashish Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Shiv Shanker Prasad,J.

¶2

Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of the applicant in the Court today is taken on record.

¶3

Heard Mr. Ashish Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Shravan Kumar Ojha, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the entire material available on record.

¶4

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant-Amzad with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Sessions Trial No. 543 of 2022 arising out of Case Crime No. 322 of 2018, under Sections 34/307, 427 I.P.C., Sections 3/5A/8 of Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act and Section 11 (6) of Animal Cruelty Act, Police Station-Nichlaul, District-Mahrajganj, during the pendency of trial.

¶5

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant is the driver of Pick-up and he transports the alleged animals as per the instruction given by the owner of the said Pick-up and he has no concern with any slaughtering of animals.

¶6

Learned counsel for the applicant has next submitted that though the firing is said to have made in the said incident, however, no police personnel has received any injury and the applicant has no concern whatsoever with the cows, which are said to be being transported in the Pick-up and infact, the said cows belong to other three co-accused persons, who have fled away from the place of the incident. There is no public or eye witness on the basis of which it can be said that the applicant is involved in the commission of the alleged offence.

¶7

It is then submitted that the co-accused, namely, Sameer @Deepak, Jahiruddin and Firoz have already been enlarged on bail by the Coordinate Benches of this Court vide orders dated 5th December, 2018, 31st May, 2019 and 23rd June, 2020 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 46459 of 2018, 20310 of 2019 and 16211 of 2020 respectively. The case of the present applicant is similar and identical to that of the aforesaid co-accused. As such the present applicant is also liable to be enlarged on bail. The applicant has two criminal antecedents to his credit except the present one but the same have satisfactorily been explained in paragraph-9 of the affidavit accompanying the present bail application. It is next contended that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses and in case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail. The applicant is in jail since 20th June, 2022.

¶8

Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the

¶9

applicant but he could not dispute the factual submissions as urged by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶10

Considering the nature of the offence, provision for initiation of cases and release the accused, material/evidence brought on record, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, as well as the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Versus State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22, let the applicant involved in aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions:-

¶11

(i) 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.

¶12

(ii) 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.

¶13

(iii) 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.

¶14

(iv) 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.

¶15

It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of the bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case.

¶16

(Shiv Shanker Prasad, J.)

¶17

Order Date :- 21.11.2022

¶18

Sushil/-

¶19

Digitally signed by SUSHIL KUMAR SINGH Date: 2022.11.23 09:23:44 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Amzad v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amzad 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

Akash Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Shatrughan Singh Vs State of U.P.

Satyam Gupta Vs State of U.P.

Bachchan and 2 Others Vs State of U.P.

Shubham Sonkar @ Chotu Sonkar Vs State of U.P.

Gulzar and Another Vs State of U.P.