Guddu Alias Saeed Vs State of U.P.

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:192445

Court No. - 69

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 42635 of 2023

Applicant :- Guddu Alias Saeed Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Krishna Dutt Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Krishna Dutt Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Ram Prakash Shukla, learned counsel for the State and perused the material on record.

¶7

This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant- Guddu Alias Saeed , seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 566 of 2023, under Sections 498-A, 323, 328, 304(B) I.P.C. & 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Civil Line, District Moradabad.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant is the father-in-law of the deceased Smt. Muskan. He has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is argued that the marriage of Muskan was solemnized with Shahjeb the son of the applicant on 24.11.2021. It is further argued that general and omnibus allegations have been levelled against the applicant and all the accused persons. The deceased was not found to have received any bodily injury by the doctor conducting the postmortem examination. The cause of death could not be ascertained, viscera was preserved and in its examination Organo Chloro insecticide was found. It is argued that Shahjeb @ Fareed the husband of the deceased is in jail. The applicant is aged about 60 years. The applicant has no criminal history as stated in para 16 of the affidavit and is in jail since 06.07.2023.

¶9

Per contra , learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail and argued that the applicant is named in the first information report along with other accused persons and there are allegations against him in the first information report.

¶10

After having heard learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is evident that the applicant is father-in-law of the deceased. General and omnibus allegations have been levelled against the applicant and other accused persons in the first information report. The husband of the deceased is in jail.

¶11

Looking to the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence, this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

¶12

Let the applicant- Guddu Alias Saeed , 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 with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶13

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

¶14

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.

¶15

(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.

¶16

(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.

¶17

(v) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the 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 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 and the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A IPC.

¶18

(vi) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the applicant.

¶19

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.

¶20

The bail application is allowed .

¶21

Order Date :- 6.10.2023 AS Rathore

¶22

(Samit Gopal,J.)

¶23

Digitally signed by :- ABHISHEK SINGH RATHOR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Guddu Alias Saeed v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Guddu Alias Saeed v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mukarram Gada Vs State of U.P.

Dalel Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shakeeluddin @ Shakil Don Vs State of U.P.

Naresh Vs State of U.P.

Deepak Prajapati Vs State of U.P.

Joni @ Pawan Vs State of U.P.