Allahabad High Court
Layak Ali vs State Of U.P. on 18 August, 2023
Author: Rajeev Misra
Bench: Rajeev Misra
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:166685 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 32565 of 2023 Applicant :- Layak Ali Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Atmaram Nadiwal,Dinesh Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.
1. Heard Mr. Dinesh Kumar Yadav, the learned counsel for applicant and the learned A.G.A. for State.
2. Perused the Court.
3. This application for bail has been filed by applicant-Layak Ali seeking his enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 26 of 2023 under Sections 323, 336, 307, 504, 506, 325, 304 I.P.C., Police Station-Bhitauli, District- Maharajganj, during the pendency of trial.
4. Record shows that in respect of an incident, which is alleged to have occurred on 18.03.2023, a prompt F.I.R. dated 18.03.2023, was lodged by first informant-Smt. Tashreekun Neesha and was registered as Case Crime No. 26 of 2023 under Sections 323, 504, 506, 336, I.P.C., Police Station-Bhitauli, District- Maharajganj. In the aforesaid F. I.R., four persons namely Waseem, Mannuddin, Layak Ali (applicant herein) and Aijazuddin have been nominated as named accused.
5. The gravamen of the allegations made in the F.I.R. is to the effect that named accused assaulted certain persons from the side of first informant on account of which they sustained injuries.
6. As per F.I.R. as noted above, four persons namely Tashreekun Neesha, Ali Hussain, Sazzad and Akram sustained injuries. The Medico Legal Reports are on record from page 29 onwards. However, one of the injured namely Sazzad ultimately succumbed to the injuries sustained by him on 29.03.2023. Accordingly, the case was converted under Section 304 I.P.C.
7. In addition to above, in respect of same occurrence another F.I.R. dated 06.05.2023 was lodged from the side of applicant and was registered as Case Crime No. 0049 of 2023 under Sections 147, 323, 324, 504, 506, 336, 427, 452 I.P.C.. In the aforesaid F.I.R. ten persons namely Akram, Ali Ussain, Sazzad, Imran Anamul, Kamr Alam, Basre Alam, Tasrifunnisha, Hakimullah and Rajesh have been nominated as named accused.
8. As per aforementioned F.I.R. three persons from the side of applicant namely Azazuddin, Mr. Layak Ali and Waseem sustained injury. Their injury reports are on record as Annexure 9 to the affidavit filed in support of present application for bail.
9. According to the learned counsel for applicant since there are cross version in respect of the same occurrence, therefore, occurrence is admitted to the facts. In the same incident four persons from the side of accused have also sustained injury. On the above premise, he therefore contends that prima-facie the issue to be decided by court is, " as to who is the aggressor". However, as per material collected by Investigating Officer, upto this stage, it cannot be conclusively concluded as to who is the aggressor and therefore, the same is subject to trial evidence. The police report (charge-sheet) in terms of Section 173 (2) Cr.P.C. has already been submitted. Therefore the entire evidence sought to be relied upon by the prosecution against applicant stands crystallised. Upto this stage, no such incriminating circumstance has emerged necessitating the custodial arrest of applicant during the pendency of trial. Even otherwise, applicant is a man of clean antecedents inasmuch as he has no criminal history to his credit except the present one.Applicant is in custody since 20.03.2023. As such, he has under-gone almost five months of incarceration. He therefore contends that applicant is liable to be enlarged on bail. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall co-operate with the trial.
10. Per contra, the learned A.G.A. for State and the learned counsel for first informant have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail. They submit that since the applicant is a named as well as charge-sheet accused, therefore he does not deserve any indulgence by this Court. Criminality committed by applicant alongwth other charge-sheeted accused is joint and common. As such the same is incapable of separation or segregation. On account of the act of applicant and other charge sheeted accused one person had lost his life whereas three others have sustained injuries. As such no sympathy be shown by this Court in favour of applicant. However, they could not dislodge the factual and legal submissions urged by learned counsel for applicant with reference to the record at this stage.
11. Having heard the learned counsel for applicant, the learned A.G.A. for State, the learned counsel for first informant, upon consideration of material on record, evidence, gravity and nature of offence, accusations made as well as complicity of applicant coupled with the fact that there are cross-versions of the occurrence inasmuchas cross F.I.Rs. have been lodged from both sides, there are injured from both sides, as such occurrence is admitted, prima-facie the issue to be decided by court below is " as to who is the aggressor", as per material collected by Investigating Officer, it cannot be conclusively concluded as to who is the aggressor at this stage and therefore, the same is subject to trial evidence, the police report (charge-sheet) in terms of Section 173 (2) Cr.P.C. has already been submitted, therefore the entire evidence sought to be relied upon by the prosecution against applicant stands crystallised but in spite of above the learned A.G.A. and the learned counsel for first informant could not point out any such circumstance from record necessitating the custodial arrest of applicant during the pendency of trial, the judgement of Supreme Court in Sumit Subhashchandra Gangwal Vs. State of Maharashtra, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 373 (Paragraph 5), the clean antecedents of applicant, the period of incarceration undergone by applicant and but without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, applicant has made out a case for bail
12. Accordingly, present bail applications is allowed.
13. Let the applicant-Layak Ali involved in aforesaid case crime number be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond each 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:-
(i) Applicant will not tamper with prosecution evidence.
(ii) 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.
(iii) Applicant will not indulge in any unlawful activities.
(iv) Applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever.
14. 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 of applicant and send him to prison.
Order Date :- 18.8.2023 YK