Allahabad High Court
Sheru @ Jainuddin And Another vs State Of U.P. on 20 April, 2023
Author: Renu Agarwal
Bench: Renu Agarwal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 85 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6558 of 2023 Applicant :- Sheru @ Jainuddin And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Vinod Kumar Tirpathi,Nimesh Kumar Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Mrs. Renu Agarwal,J.
Heard, learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. and perused the record.
The present first bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicants in Case Crime No. 04 of 2023, under Sections 3/5/8 of U.P. Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act, Police Station Shahganj, District Jaunpur with the prayer to enlarge them on bail.
Learned counsel for the accused-applicants submitted that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the instant case due to malafide intentions. The applicants are named in the first information report. From the alleged place of incident, 160 kg. beef was recovered along with other instruments which were allegedly used in cow slaughtering. There is no public witness of the incident. Nothing has been recovered either on the pointing out or from the possession of the applicants. There is no forensic report collected by the prosecution regarding the alleged recovered beef which belongs to cow or some other animals. There is no cogent piece of evidence so as to connect the present applicants with the instant matter. Identically situated co-accused Hasamuddin and two other have already been granted bail by coordinate bench of this Court vide order dated 19.04.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 5973 of 2023 . The applicants are seeking parity with the aforesaid co-accused. Learned counsel for the applicants lastly submits that the applicants are in jail since 04.01.2023 having no criminal history and that in case applicants are enlarged on bail, the applicants will not misuse the liberty of bail.
On the other hand, learned AGA has opposed the prayer of bail but could not controvert the aforesaid arguments as advanced by learned counsel for the applicant.
Considering the fact that the applicants were named in the F.I.R. There is no public witness of the incident. Nothing has been recovered either on the pointing out or from the possession of the applicants. There is no forensic report collected by the prosecution regarding the alleged recovered beef which belongs to cow or some other animals and co-accused have already been granted bail, coupled with the fact that there is no other criminal history of the applicants, accused-applicants are liable to be released on bail.
Let the applicants Sheru @ Jainuddin and Samsuddin be released on bail in the above case crime number and on their furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Court concerned with the following conditions :-
(i) The applicants 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.
(ii) The applicants 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.
(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 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.
(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 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.
(v) The applicants shall also furnish an undertaking from the sureties that the properties (movable/immovable) which are the basis of accepting the surety, shall not be disposed of by them till the conclusion of trial.
(vi) The applicants shall also give an undertaking to the effect that he will not change his address without prior intimation to the trial court concerned.
Order Date :- 20.4.2023 (Renu Agarwal,J) T.S.