Hon'ble Court No. 90 disposed of a bail application filed by Naushad in a case involving cow slaughter and injury to persons. The court considered the nature of the offence, lack of recovery, and appeal submissions.
Release on bail with personal bond and two local sureties, subject to conditions regarding court appearance and non-abuse of liberty.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 90 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 51352 of 2022 Applicant :- Naushad Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ashish Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Shiv Shanker Prasad,J.
Heard Mr. Ashish Kumar, Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant, Mr. Amit Kumar Shukla, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the entire material available on record.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicantNaushad with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Crime No. 183 of 2022, under Section 307, 427 I.P.C. and Sections 3/5A/8 Prevention of Cow Salughter Act, Police Station-Purandarpur, District-Maharajganj, during the pendency of trial.
The prosecution case is that when the informant along with other Police Personnels due to occasion of Independence Day i.e 15th August, were on patrolling duty, one of Police Personnel received an information from a Police Personnel that a pick up Van (vehicle) was standing behind the house of co-accused Prem Chandra in which animals for slaughtering were kept. On the basis of said information the informant and other Police Personnels went to the said place but on the way they again received an information that the said vehicle was going to the forest, thereafter the informant and other Police Personnels by a private vehicle followed the said vehicle and when they tried to stop the said vehicle and it hit the vehicle of the Police Personnels and the co-accused Prem Chandra Yadav sitting in the said vehicle jumped and tired to run away but after making some effort, he was caught by the Police.
The learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has not been named in the first information report and on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused Prem Chandra, who has been arrested from the spot, the applicant has been implicated in the present case. It is next submitted that the confessional statement given by the co-accused Prem Chandra Yadav before the Police has no evidentiary value as per the provisions of Evidence Act. Nothing incriminating has been recovered from the possession of the applicant or his pointing out. Except the confessional statement, there is no direct or indirect evidence against the applicant. There is no injury report of any of the Police Personnels on the basis of which it can be said that in the hitting done by the vehicle of co-accused to the vehicle of the Police, any police personnel has sustained any injury, therefore, no case under Section 307 I.P.C. is made out against the applicant. There is also no evidence on record on the basis of which it is established that the vehicle of the co-accused hit the vehicle of the Police. The applicant has no criminal antecedents to his credit except the present one. 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 11th October, 2022.
Per contra learned A.G.A. and the learned counsel for the complainant have opposed the bail prayer of the applicant but they could not dispute the factual submissions as urged by the learned counsel for the applicant.
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:-
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
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.
(Shiv Shanker Prasad, J.)
Order Date :- 16.11.2022/Sushil/-
Digitally signed by SUSHIL KUMAR SINGH Date: 2022.11.17 09:26:32 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
3 issues framed by the court
Whether to grant bail to the applicant charged with offences under Section 307, 427 IPC and the Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act.
Whether insufficient evidence and lack of criminal antecedents warrant the release of the applicant on bail.
What conditions should be imposed on the applicant to prevent misuse of bail or interference with judicial process.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Dataram Singh Versus State of U.P. and anotherReferred¶7
(2018) 3 SCC 22 · Who else cites this
7 provisions across 3 enactments
Naushad
Shiv Shanker Prasad
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
Shiv Shanker Prasad
Parties & counsel
