Allowed

Mustaak v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC22 Dec 2022BAIL/56138/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court granted bail to the applicant in a criminal case involving sections 304, 323, 504, and 325 IPC. The applicant claimed self-defense, had no prior criminal history, and was otherwise reliable. The court held there was merit in submissions allowing bail release on a personal bond and two sureties.

What did the court decide?

The applicant mustaak be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount.

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

¶1

Court No. - 90

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 56138 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Mustaak Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sadhana Singh,Shatrughan Jee Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Sunil Kumar Yadav

¶4

Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.

¶5

By means of this bail application the applicant has prayed to be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No.192 of 2022 at Police Station-Aurai, DistrictBhadohi under Sections 304, 323, 504 and 325 IPC. The applicant is in jail since 17.08.2022.

¶6

The bail application of the applicant was rejected by the learned Sessions Judge, Bhadohi on 17.09.2022.

¶7

This Court is also directly entertaining the bail application under Section 325 IPC as the offence arises from the same incident. Interests of justice require that the applicant should not be sent into repeated orbits of litigation to secure his liberty.

¶8

Ms.Sadhana Singh, learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. The F.I.R. is one part of cross case arising out of the same

¶9

incident. The informant and his party attacked the applicant and his family members. The applicant acted in self defence for the protection of lives of his family members and his property. The applicant did not exceed his right of self defence. The applicant has suffered grievous injury on his head in the incident. A number of other persons from the applicant's side have also sustained injuries in the assault made by the informant's party. Admittedly, the deceased was an old and infirm person who joined the fray and was accidentally struck a blow. Nature of injuries sustained by the deceased discloses that there was no intent to kill by the applicant.A vague and a general role has been assigned to the applicant in the assault. The applicant has not been identified as the principal offender who inflicted what eventually became the fatal blow on the deceased.

¶10

The applicant does not have any criminal history apart from the instant case. The applicant resides at Bhadohi where he works for a living. The applicant is not a flight risk. The applicant is a law abiding citizen who has cooperated with the criminal investigation and shall join the trial proceeding. There is no possibility of his influencing witnesses, tampering with the evidence or reoffending.

¶11

Shri Paritosh Kumar Malviya, learned AGA-I for the State as well as Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the informant could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. They do not dispute the fact that the applicant does not have any criminal history apart from this case.

¶12

I see merit in the submissions of the learned counsel for the applicant and hold that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶13

In the light of the preceding discussion and without making any observations on the merits of the case, the bail application is allowed.

¶14

Let the applicant-Mustaak 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 the court concerned subject to following conditions.

¶15

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶16

(ii) The applicant will not influence any witness.

¶17

(iii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶18

(iv) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly

¶19

make inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade her from disclosing such facts to the Court to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶20

In case any averment made in the bail application or the submissions during the argument are found to be false or in case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.

¶21

Order Date :- 22.12.2022 Ashish Tripathi

¶22

Digitally signed by :- ASHISH NAYAN TRIPATHI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Mustaak v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mustaak 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

Mangala Gond (Father-in-Law) Vs State of U.P.

Rakshad Vs State of U.P and 2 Others

Vikas @ Vipin Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Shahnajar Urf Sonu Caudhary Vs State of U.P.

Sanju Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Manbodh Vs State of U.P.