Allahabad High Court
Mahraj vs State Of U.P. on 25 June, 2025
Author: Siddharth
Bench: Siddharth
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:99680 Court No. - 66 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 21008 of 2025 Applicant :- Mahraj Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ambreen Masroor,Sadrul Islam Jafri Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Siddharth,J.
Heard Sri N.I. Jafri, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri S.I. Jafri, learned counsel for the applicant; Sri A.C. Srivastava, learned counsel for the informant; learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record.
The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Mahraj, with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 771 of 2019, under Sections 323, 307, 328 IPC, Police Station Nauchandi, District- Meerut, during pendency of trial.
Learned Senior Counsel for the applicant has submitted that earlier applicant was enlarged on bail by trial court on 31.3.2023 under Sections 323, 328, 307 IPC. Thereafter bail cancellation application of the applicant was moved, which was allowed on the ground that in the F.S.L. report of the victim, aluminium phosphide was found, which was not pointed out by either of the parties at the time of hearing of bail application of the applicant. He has submitted that victim must have consumed poison on her own and committed suicide. Aluminium phosphide cannot be administered forcibly by anyone since it gives foul smell. Learned Senior Counsel for the applicant further submits that applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. He has no previous criminal history to his credit and is languishing in jail since 27.11.2024. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.
Learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. have opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, he does not deserves any indulgence. In case the applicant is released on bail he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail.
Having considered the submissions of the parties noted above, finding force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant; keeping in view uncertainty regarding conclusion of trial; one sided investigation by police, ignoring the case of accused side; applicant being under-trial having fundamental right to speedy; larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, considering the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Manish Sisodia Vs. Directorate of Enforcement, 2024 LawSuit (SC) 677, considering 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above their capacity by under trials and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, let the applicant involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions that :-
(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.
(ii) 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.
(iii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(iv) In case the applicant misuse 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 him in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(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.
In case, of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
Identity and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.
Order Date :- 25.6.2025 Ruchi Agrahari