Allowed

Murtuza and Another v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC24 Mar 2023BAIL/52939/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court allowed an application for bail, granting release to applicants accused under IPC Sections 324, 307, 504, and 506. The court imposed conditions including personal bonds with heavy sureties, mandatory attendance at trial stages, and prohibitions on seeking adjournments.

What did the court decide?

Applicants released on bail with personal bond involving two heavy sureties each under specific conditions regarding court attendance and no adjournments.

Murtuza and Another Vs State of U.P. — Cheque Dishonour | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 86

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 52939 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Murtuza And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mohd. Zaid Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Arvind Kumar

¶4

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Mohd. Zaid, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Arvind Kumar, learned counsel for the complainant and Sri Mithlesh Kumar, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State.

¶6

It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. It is next contended that applicant no.1 is the husband of the victim and applicant no.2 is dever of the victim. It is next contended that the applicants have not committed the offence in question. It is next contended that the incident has not taken place in the manner as stated by the prosecution and the real facts of the case are that the informant niece continuously pressurized the applicant no.1 to live separately from their parents which was straightway refused by applicant no.1-husband and on 13.7.2022 informant's niece called their family members and make settlement but their cousin brother Naeen got hyper and took their knife run towards applicant no.2 meanwhile informant and their family members caught the same and scrambled their knifes and in this way Naeem succumbed to his injuries.

¶7

Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicants have also been placed forth before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused has also been touched upon at length. It has been assured on behalf of the applicants that they are ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make themselves available before the court whenever required. It has also been submitted that the applicants are languishing in jail since 6.1.2018. It has been pointed out that the applicants have no criminal history.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail.

¶9

Considering the nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of

¶10

conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tempering of the witnesses and prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge and reformative theory of punishment the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case.

¶11

Let the applicants Murtaza and Irtaza involved in Case Crime No.157 of 2022, under Sections 324, 307, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Janakpuri, District Saharanpur be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond with two heavy sureties each (one should be of a family member) in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions.

¶12

(i) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they 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.

¶13

(ii) The applicants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against them under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶14

(iii) In case, the applicants 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 applicants fail to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against them, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶15

(iv) The applicants 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 applicants are 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 them in accordance with law.

¶16

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

¶17

Order Date :- 24.3.2023 Dev/-

¶18

Digitally signed by :- DEV PRAKASH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Murtuza and Another v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Murtuza and Another 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

Mohd Faiz Vs State of U.P.

Savej Vs State of U.P.

Mohit Vs State of U.P.

Neeraj Kumar Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Devendra Sharma @ Lalu Vs State of U.P.

Ram Awatar Vs State of U.P.