Allahabad High Court
Mijahiddin @ Mohd. Mujahid Husain And 2 ... vs State Of U.P. on 23 February, 2021
Author: Ali Zamin
Bench: Ali Zamin
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 70 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 49803 of 2020 Applicant :- Mijahiddin @ Mohd. Mujahid Husain And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Vinay Kumar Shukla,Akash Gupta,Apoorva Bhatt Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Rajendra Kumar Rathore,Sunil Kumar Singh Hon'ble Ali Zamin,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State, learned counsel for the informant and perused the material available on record.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No.576 of 2020, under Sections 147, 323, 504, 506, 386 I.P.C., Police Station Civil Lines, District Prayagraj.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that according to the FIR version on 11.10.2020 at about 6:00 p.m. informant was doing his chamber work in his office. Ramesh Nisad and the applicants in a well planned manner came and started abusing him, on protest, they started to call miscreants, thereafter, a Toyota Etios Car No.UP70DR6232 came having five persons, they all assembled there and started abusing and beating the informant and when his wife came to save him then they scuffled with her also. Applicant Mijahiddin @ Mohd. Mujahid Husain threatening to kill and stating that if you have to live in the colony you have to pay Rs.10,000/- per month as ransom. He informed to the Police on Police Helpline No.112, police came there and arrested the applicant and three others and took them to the police station. The whole incident is captured in the CCTV footage. Learned counsel further submits that as per CCTV footage, the applicant Mijahiddin @ Mohd. Mujahid Husain was only intervening to resolve the dispute. He further submits that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the instant case. There is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses and, in case, the applicants are enlarged on bail, they shall not misuse the liberty of bail.It is next submitted that the applicants are languishing in jail since 14.10.2020.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the informant have opposed the bail prayer of the applicants by submitting that applicants are resident of State of Bihar and in case, they are released on bail, they will not face the trial. He further submits that as per para 16 of the counter affidavit, applicants filed bail application and notice no.47030 of 2020 dated 26.11.2020 was given to State, subsequently, they prepared separate applications and on 17.12.2020, separate notice on behalf of Amjad Khan, no.50443/2020, on behalf of Mohd. Mujahiddin, notice no. 50583/2020 on behalf of Aurangjeb, notice no. 50584/2020 have been given to the State of U.P. He further submits that on 11.11.2020 at 12:39 p.m. brother of the accused who told his name Sajid Ali threatened on mobile no.9369038835 from mobile no.9838786344 for ransom as well as to withdraw the case regarding which an application was moved on 12.11.2020 to the Senior Superintendent of Police Prayagraj and FIR u/s 386 and 507 IPC is lodged on 4.12.2020. He next submits that there is no reason to falsely implicate the applicants, therefore, they do not deserve any benevolence.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, nature of the offence as well as as per CCTV footage role of applicants Mijahiddin @ Mohd. Mujahid Husain and others, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, the applicants Mijahiddin @ Mohd. Mujahid Husain, Amjad Husain and Auranjeb are entitled for bail, let the applicants involved in the aforesaid case crime be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions :-
(i) The applicants will not tamper with the evidence and pressurize the witnesses during trial.
(ii) 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.
(iii) The applicants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of their absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against them under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(iv) In case, the applicants misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicants fail to appear before the court on the date fixed, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against them, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(v) 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 applicants are 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 them in accordance with law.
The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.
The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
Order Date :- 23.2.2021 m.a.