Allowed

Nafees v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC29 May 2023BAIL/23972/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal Misc. Bail Application where the applicant, charged under IPC Sections 304, 323, 324, 504, and 506, applied for bail. The High Court allowed the bail after noting that the deceased did not die from ante mortem injuries and specific assault role by the applicant was not clearly pinned down in witness statements, albeit acknowledging prosecutorial stance.

What did the court decide?

The applicant, Nafees, is released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties on conditions of court appearance and non-interference.

Nafees Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:118919

¶2

Court No. - 74

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 23972 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Nafees Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Farid Ahmad Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Farid Ahmad, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Umer Ritesh Kumar, learned AGA, for the State.

¶7

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No.59 of 2023, under Sections 304,323, 324, 504, 506 and 34 IPC, Police Station Asmouli, District Sambhal during pendency of the trial.

¶8

FIR of the present case was lodged against the applicant and three others under Sections 323,504 and 506 IPC and according to the FIR, applicant and other co-accused persons made assault upon the husband of the informant through wooden stick and kicks and fists and when her dever-Nazakat, nephew-Kamil and son-Asif tried to save him then co-accused persons ran away from spot. It is further mentioned in the FIR that due to assault made by co-accused persons, her husband, dever, nephew and son sustained injuries.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that initially FIR of the present case was lodged under Sections 323, 504 and 506 IPC but after the death of the husband of the informant case was converted under Section 304 IPC. He further submits that incident is said to have taken place on 14.2.2023 and FIR of the present case was lodged on 16.2.2023, i..e, after about

¶10

two days and no explanation has been given by the informant in this regard.

¶11

He next submits that from the perusal of the post mortem report of the deceased it appears that he sustained four injuries but he did not die due to ante mortem injury and according to the Doctor, opinion with regard to cause of death could only be disclosed by him after receiving the report of histopathological and toxicological analysis and this fact suggests that due to the assault of applicant and other co-accused persons, deceased did not loss his life.

¶12

He further submits that during investigation when the statement of the injured witnesses were recorded then they although stated that applicant and other accused persons started abusing the deceased but they did not assign any role to applicant in causing any injury to the deceased and they stated that Anadil, Mukim and Rahish @ Lalla made assault upon the deceased.

¶13

He next submits that applicant is not having any previous criminal history and in the present matter he is in jail since 22.2.2023.

¶14

Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submits that applicant was named in the FIR and all the injured persons also stated that he along with other accused persons started abusing the deceased but due to the mistake of Investigating Officer in place of applicant the name of his father has been mentioned in the statements of injured witnesses but he could not dispute that no specific role has been assigned to the applicant and from the post mortem report of the deceased it appears that he did not die due to ante mortem injury.

¶15

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.

¶16

Initially, FIR of the present case was lodged under Sections 323,504 and 506 IPC but after the death of the deceased case was converted under Section 304 IPC.

¶17

Although, all the injured witnesses stated that applicant along with three others started making abusing the deceased but they did not state that they made any assault although it appears that in place of applicant, his father's name has been mentioned in their statements along with other accused persons, who made assault, therefore, I find force in the argument of learned AGA that due to inadvertence Investigating Officer in their statements in place of applicant, mentioned the name of his father but from the post mortem report it appears that deceased although sustained four injuries but he did not die due to ante mortem injury and according to the Doctor, he will disclose the cause of death after receipt of report of histopathological and toxicological analysis.

¶18

Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶19

Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed.

¶20

Let the applicant- Nafees be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶21

(i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted.

¶22

(ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶23

(iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and antisocial activity.

¶24

In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant.

¶25

It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial.

¶26

Order Date :- 29.5.2023

¶27

SKM

¶28

Digitally signed by :- SHRAVANA KUMAR MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Nafees v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nafees 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Deepak Nishad Vs State of U.P.

Sukhlal Vs State of U.P.

Monis Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Waseem Ahmad Vs State of U.P.

Anadil Vs State of U.P.

Abhishek Singh Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others