Allowed

Tamseel and 3 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Anubhag Lko.

Allahabad HC5 Aug 2024/5615/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Four applicants sought bail in a case involving alleged recovery of country-made firearms while transporting animals for slaughter. Noting no public witness, charge-sheet filed, trial not commenced, co-accused already bailed, and explained criminal history, the court granted bail with conditions.

What did the court decide?

Applicants released on bail on furnishing personal bond with two reliable sureties each, subject to stated conditions.

Tamseel and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home… — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:53609

¶2

Court No. - 8

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5615 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Tamseel And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Anubhag Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Sudhir Kumar Rai,Dharmendra Kumar,Dhirendra Vikram Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Jaspreet Singh,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicants and Vishwas Saraswat, learned A.G.A. for the State-respondent and perused the record.

¶7

The instant bail application has been moved by four applicants who have been arraigned in Case Crime No.74 of 2024, under Sections 3/5Ka/8 Cow Slaughter Prevention Act and 3/25 Arms Act, relating to police station Ajgain, District Unnao.

¶8

As per the avermentns made in the FIR, it is alleged that the police personnel had received a tip from an informant that the applicants and other co-accused were in the process of transporting animals for the purposes of slaughtering. Acting upon the aforesaid tip, the police party raided the site and confiscated a vehicle and ten persons were apprehended which also included the present four applicants as under:

¶9

(i) In so far as the applicant no.1 Tamseel is concerned, it is alleged that from his possession one country made fire arm of 12 bore, a cartridge, a mobile phone and a cash of Rs.4200/- was recovered.

¶10

(ii) From applicant no.2 Danish, it is alleged that one country made pistol of 12 bore, two cartridges, a mobile phone and Rs.5100/- cash was recovered from his possession.

¶11

(iii) From applicant no.3 Nawab, one country made pistol, one cartridge and a cash of Rs.3100/- was recovered from his possession.

¶12

(iv) In so far as the applicant no.4 Imran is concerned, one country made pistol of 12 bore, one cartridge and a cash of Rs.2900/- and one mobile phone was recovered from his possession.

¶13

It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants as aforesaid have been

¶14

falsely implicated. It is urged that as per the FIR apart from the present four applicants, six other co-accused were also said to have been apprehended. Amongst the other coaccused Shakir, Chhanga, Ateeq, Mohd. Danish and Naeem have been enlarged on bail. It is also urged that the applicants are languishing in jail since 16.03.2024.

¶15

It is surprising that there is no public witness of the alleged recovery and in order to show good work, the police personnel have slapped these cases against the applicants. The applicants are persons having roots in the society and neither are at flight risk or can tamper with the evidence as the charge-sheet has already been submitted. There is no likelihood for the trial to commence and conclude soon and moreover in the aforesaid circumstances, the applicants be enlarged on bail.

¶16

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail and submits that all the aforesaid four applicants have number of cases and they are repeat offenders. It is urged that even though the charge-sheet may have been filed but the fact remains that since the applicants are repeat offenders and they would be in a position to tamper with the evidence and influence the witnesses and in the aforesaid circumstances, the bail application deserves to be dismissed.

¶17

The Court has heard the learned counsel for the parties and also perused the material on record.

¶18

As far as the alleged recovery is concerned, it is not disputed by the learned A.G.A. and there is no public witness. It is also not disputed by the learned A.G.A. that the charge-sheet has already been filed. The custody of the applicants are not required for any further interrogation.

¶19

This Court further finds that in so far as the contention regarding the applicants being repeat offenders is concerned, the counsel for the applicants have explained the criminal history of each of the four applicants in paragraphs 9 to 13 of the rejoinder-afÏdavit. From the perusal of the same, it would indicate (a) that eight cases including the present one have been shown against the applicant no.1, out of which he has been enlarged on bail in four cases, (b) as far as the applicant no.2 is concerned, six cases have been show against him including the present and he has been enlarged on bail in four cases, (c) the applicant no.3 has 15 cases including the present case to his credit, out of which he has bailed out in ten cases, (d) as far as the applicant no.4 is concerned, six cases including the present one and he has been enlarged on bail in three cases. In one of the cases he is not involved.

¶20

Having considered the aforesaid and noticing the fact that the applicants have been in jail since 16.03.2024 coupled with the fact that the charge-sheet has been filed and the other co-accused, namely, Mohd. Danish, he has

¶21

been enlarged on bail vide order 09.05.2024 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.4103 of 2024, Chhanga has been granted bail by means of order dated 07.05.2024 by this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.4879 of 2024, Naeem and Ateeq have been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 16.05.2024 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.5301 of 2024 and Shakir has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 22.05.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.5500 of 2024, have been enlarged on bail and the fact that whether the applicants are involved or not is a subject matter which is to be tested in trial and it is not disputed that the trial has yet not begun and in the chargesheet, 14 witnesses have been indicated which are to be examined.

¶22

Taking into account the overall facts and circumstances and considering that the applicant are not at flight risk or in a position to tamper with the evidence, hence at this stage, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicants are entitled to be released on bail.

¶23

Let the applicants Tamseel, Danish, Nawab and Imran involved in FIR/Case Crime No.74 of 2024, under Sections 3/5Ka/8 Cow Slaughter Prevention Act and 3/25 Arms Act, relating to police station Ajgain, District Unnao be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond with two heavy reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

¶24

At the time of executing required sureties the following conditions shall be imposed in the interest of justice.

¶25

(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.

¶26

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

¶27

(iii) In case, the applicants misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C.are 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.

¶28

(iv) The applicants shall remain present, in person, before

¶29

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 sufÏcient 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.

¶30

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶31

Order Date :- 5.8.2024 ank

¶32

Digitally signed by :- ALI NEWAZ KHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Tamseel and 3 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Anubhag Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tamseel and 3 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Anubhag Lko.

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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Satya Dev Pathak Vs Deputy Director of Consolidation and 5 Others

Jakir Ali Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy., Revenue Deptt., Lucknow and Others

Mohd. Sadique Vs Union of India Deptt. of Air Customs Thru. Deepak Kumar Inspector Air Customs Officer

Mohd. Usman vs Board of Revenue, U.P. Lucknow Thru. Chairman and Others

Jyoti Shankar Pandey vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue, Lucknow and Others

Tufail Ahmad vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lucknow and Others