Allahabad High Court
Abdul Hannan vs State Of U.P. on 3 December, 2019
Author: Karunesh Singh Pawar
Bench: Karunesh Singh Pawar
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH ?Court No. - 27 Case :- BAIL No. - 9004 of 2019 Applicant :- Abdul Hannan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Firoz Ahmad Khan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
As per the prosecution case on 18.11.2018 at about 20:58 hours, F.I.R. was lodged by the complainant under Section 364-A I.P.C. alleging that on 16.11.2018 at about 7:PM, he received a mobile call on his number from 918370801774, that his younger brother is in his custody and a ransom of Rs. 10,00,000/- was demanded at Malda Railway Station for release of his brother. It is further alleged that on 14.11.2018 while the younger brother of the complainant went to Kolkata along with one Hashim for taking delivery of machine for preparing dona, he was kidnapped. It is further alleged that neighbor of the complainant also received a phone call to quickly arrange the money otherwise the abductee shall be killed. The applicant is languishing in jail since 25.11.2018 without having any previous criminal antecedents.
Learned counsel for the applicant has drawn attention of the Court towards the recovery memo which is on record and which depicts that on calling of the complainant, the applicant along with the abductee walked in the hotel and there he was arrested and nothing was recovered from their personal search. It is thus contended on behalf of the applicant that the alleged arrest is false. The applicant has been arrested from some other place and have been falsely shown to be arrested in Gitanjali Hotel. There is no public witness to the alleged recovery memo and no staff from Gitanjali Hotel has been made witness of the alleged recovery memo. The necessary ingredients of Section 364-A are missing. The prosecution story is highly doubtful as no one, who kidnaps a person, will not walk with the kidnapped person on calling of the complainant unarmed. Further as per the report of the trial court 01.10.2019 till date the prosecution has not been able to examine a single prosecution witness.
It is further submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away from judicial custody or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, and also considering the nature of allegations, arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail.
Let the applicant, Abdul Hannan, involved in Case Crime/F.I.R. No. 429/2018, under Sections 364-A I.P.C., Police Station Raunahi, District - Faizabad, 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 which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-
(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.
(ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.
(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.
(iv) 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.
(v) 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.
(vi) 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.
Order Date :- 3.12.2019/R.C.