Allowed

Mohd. Asif Ansari @ Munnu v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Allahabad HC19 Mar 2024BAIL/3099/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a bail application for an applicant charged with offences under Sections 307, 364, 328, 201, and 34 IPC. The court found no material indicating the applicant will flee or tamper with witnesses, granting bail subject to specific conditions.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on furnishing a personal bond with two reliable sureties, subject to conditions regarding court attendance and non-interference with witnesses.

Mohd. Asif Ansari @ Munnu vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin… — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:33191

¶2

Court No. - 14

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3099 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Mohd. Asif Ansari @ Munnu Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Ali Hasan,Aftab Ahamad,Mohd. Faraz,Mohd. Suhail Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Jaspreet Singh,J.

¶6

Learned AGA has filed counter affidavit which is taken on record.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State-respondent.

¶8

The instant application has been moved seeking bail in respect of Case Crime No.378 of 2023 under Sections 307, 364, 328, 201 & 34 IPC, Police Station Para District Lucknow during trial.

¶9

The submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the case.

¶10

Submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that neither the applicant is named in the FIR nor any role has been assigned to him. It is also submitted that only because the applicant was found along with another co-accused Asma bano it is alleged that the applicant had complicity in the aforesaid crime. It is also pointed out that the very basis is that Asma Bano was never identified and it was not even actually confirmed whether the co-accused Asma Bano was one who had enticed the victim.

¶11

It is further submitted that the said co-accused Asma Bano has also already been enlarged on bail by means of the order dated 02.04.2024 passed in Criminal Misc.Bail Application no.3283 of 2024. Accordingly, the present applicant also seeks parity of the same as other than being with Asma Bano there is no material against the applicant.

¶12

Learned AGA on the other hand submits that it is alleged that the applicant was involved along with other co-accused Santosh

¶13

which has been ascribed the role of using knife to cut the throat of the victim, however, learned AGA could not dispute the fact in so far as the present applicant is concerned neither he was named in the FIR. The arrest of the applicant is only in context with the presence of the applicant with other co-accused Asma who has already been granted bail by this Court.

¶14

It is also urged that the applicant has no criminal history and is in jail since 15.11.2023. There is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away after being released on bail or tampering with the witnesses. In case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶15

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail, but could not dispute the aforesaid facts.

¶16

Considering the rival submissions as well as the facts and circumstances of the case and the material available on record also considering the nature of allegations and accusation against the applicant, the severity of the punishment if convicted and the period of incarceration as well as the fact that no apprehension has been expressed by the learned AGA that the applicant is at the risk of fleeing justice or that he would tamper with evidence or influence any witness, hence, at this stage, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶17

Accordingly, the instant bail application is allowed.

¶18

Let the applicant- Mohd. Asif Ansari @ Munnu involved in the above-mentioned case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned. At the time of executing required sureties, the following conditions shall be imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶19

(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he 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.

¶20

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

¶21

(iii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any 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 to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶22

(iv) 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. is issued and the 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 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶23

(v) The applicant 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 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.

¶24

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

¶25

Order Date :- 27.4.2024

¶26

Harshita

¶27

Digitally signed by :- HARSHITA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Mohd. Asif Ansari @ Munnu v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd. Asif Ansari @ Munnu v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home 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

Amit Engineers vs Modern Coach Factory

Atiqur Rahman vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrt. Lko.

Smt Mohra and Others Vs D.D.C.and Others

Chandrawati vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Food and Civil Supplies Civil Sectt. Lko. and 5 Others

Maa Madhuri Private Industrial Training Institute, Ballia Thru. Secy. Arvind Kumar Srivastava vs Union of India, Thru. Secy. Deptt. of Skill Development and Entrepreneurship Ministry and Ors.

Aqbal Bahadur Mishra vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko and 2 Others