Allahabad High Court
Mohd Sajid vs State Of U.P. on 20 September, 2024
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:155170 Court No. - 70 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 27528 of 2024 Applicant :- Mohd Sajid Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Akshay Raghuvanshi,Raj Raghuvanshi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.
1. Sri Akshay Raghuvanshi, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Manav Chaurasiya, learned A.G.A. for the State.
2. The instant bail application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.64 of 2024, under Sections 147, 323, 504, 506, 452, 354, 326 IPC, Police Station Cantt, District Varanasi, during pendency of the trial.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that on the basis of false allegation applicant has been made accused in the present matter and as per the allegation due to the assault made by the applicant the finger of the informant was amputated but during investigation when the statement of the victim was recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C then she stated that actually due to the bite given by the applicant her finger was amputated
4. He further submits that there are material contradictions in the version of the FIR and in the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C.
5. He further submits that even human bite does not attract the provision under Section 326 IPC. He placed the judgement of Supreme Court passed in Shakeel Ahmed Vs. State of Delhi (2004 10 SCC 103,
6. He further submits that except offence under Section 326 I.P.C all the alleged offences are punishable with maximum punishment of seven years.
7. He further submits that apart from present case, applicant is having criminal history of two other cases and criminal history of applicant has been explained in the affidavit as well as supplementary affidavit filed in support of instant application and in the present matter, applicant is in jail since 08.06.2024 i.e. last more than three months.
8. Per contra, learned AGA however, opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the argument on facts advanced by learned counsel for the applicant.
9. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.
10. From the record, it reflects that applicant alongwith 7 others has been made accused in the present matter on the basis of general and omnibus allegation and as per FIR due to assault made by the applicant the finger of the informant was amputated but when her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C was recorded which has been annexed alongwith instant application then she stated that due to the bite given by the applicant her finger was amputated and therefore it appears that there are material contradictions in the version of the FIR and in the statement of the victim i.e. informant of the case recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C
11. Further, after considering the judgement of the Supreme Court passed in the case of Shakeel Ahmed (Supra) on which reliance was placed by learned counsel for applicant, this Court finds merit that if finger of a person has been amputated due to the bite given by accused then offence under Section 326 I.P.C. is not made out. Further, except offence under Section 326 I.P.C. all the alleged offences are punishable with maximum punishment of seven years.
12. Further, apart from present matter, applicant is having criminal history of 7 other cases which has been explained in the affidavit as well as supplementary affidavit filed in support of instant application and in the present matter applicant is in jail since 08.06.2024 i.e. last more than three months.
13. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
14. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed.
15. Let the applicant- Mohd Sajid be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-
(i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted.
(ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make 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 any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
(iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity.
16. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant.
17. It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial.
Order Date :- 20.9.2024 Imtiyaz