Allahabad High Court
Mohammad Shadab & Another vs State Of U.P. on 5 June, 2020
Author: Jaspreet Singh
Bench: Jaspreet Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH ?In Chamber Case :- BAIL No. - 2864 of 2020 Applicant :- Mohammad Shadab & Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mohammad Alishah Faruqi,Ali Hasan Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Jaspreet Singh,J.
The Court has heard Sri Mohammad Alishah Faruqi, learned counsel for the applicants and Shri Ranvijay Singh, learned AGA through video conference.
The submission of learned counsel for the applicants is that in Case Crime No. 157 of 2020, the applicants have been falsely implicated, inasmuch as, It has been submitted that allegedly on 19.03.2020, the complainant and his Assistant namely Sameer were in the process of carrying out fogging to prevent the spread of COVID-19 virus. The complainant and Sameer are the employees of the Nagar Nigam and while on duty they were attacked by 15 to 20 persons and some of them allegedly called the persons who have been named in the First Information Report. Thus, it has been submitted that apparently as per the version of the First Information Report about 20-25 persons have attacked the complainant and his Assistant Sameer, however, it is only alleged that the complainant and his Assistant sustained injuries but despite the learned A.G.A. having been granted time, yet, nothing has been brought on record to substantiate the version as contained in the First Information Report.
It has also been submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants along with Abdul Rahman who is also named co-accused have been assigned similar role. The learned counsel for the applicants has further submitted that Abdul Rahman has been enlarged on bail by Sessions Judge, Lucknow in Bail Application No. 1750 of 2020 on 04.06.2020.
It has further been submitted that the role as ascribed to the applicants is the same as what has been mentioned against Abdul Rahman. The learned counsel for the applicants has further submitted that he has been falsely implicated and they do not have have any criminal history to their credit.
The learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail application, however, could not dispute that similar role has been ascribed to other named co-accused Abdul Rahman who has already been enlarged on bail by the Sessions Court.
Considering the facts and circumstances and the nature of accusation against the applicants, the material available on record and the fact that the matter is yet to be tested in trial and only when the aforesaid charges are proved beyond reasonable doubt can the applicants be convicted, hence, without expressing any opinion on merits, this Court is of the considered view that the applicants are entitled to be enlarged on bail.
The Registry of this Court has reported certain defects and in this regard the High Court has laid down a guideline vide circular dated 14.04.2020. The relevant portion thereof is being reproduced hereinafter:-
2. However, during the lock down period, the requirement of an affidavit/e-affidavit/scanned Notary Affidavit shall not be mandatory in the case of BAIL APPLICATIONS and ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATIONS. In lieu thereof, Counsel shall have to submit, in the e-filed petitions, the Adhar Card Number, full details of the card holder like name, parentage, age and address, as also the mobile number linked to the adhar card, of the person wanting to act as the deponent in the matter along with a declaration of that applicant/petitioner/pairokar affirming the correctness of the disclosures and averments made in the application/petition. In case of civil matters, a prayer for dispensing with the requirement of filing an affidavit may be made along with the urgency application which shall also be considered simultaneous with the issue of urgency.
3. This waiver or relaxation is subject to a proper affidavit being filed, in hard copy, within a period of 15 days from the date the lock down is lifted. No further time shall be granted for the purpose. In case a proper affidavit is not filed as specified above, the said case shall stand dismissed automatically and any order passed therein, shall stand recalled, without any reference to the Court. A communication, in this regard shall be sent by the Registry to the Court(s) below/authorities concerned, forthwith for consequential action."
Hence this order passed by the Court shall be subject to the compliance of the conditions as prescribed in the circular dated 14.04.2020.
Let the applicants Mohammad Shadab and Mohammad Sharik involved in Case Crime No. 0157 of 2019, under Sections 427, 307, 506, 504, 283, 323, 333, 149, 148, 147 I.P.C. & Section 3/4 Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act & 7 CLA Act, Police Station Thakurganj, District Lucknow be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions shall be imposed in the interest of justice.
(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 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.
(iii) 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 applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against them, 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 applicants 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 them in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 5.6.2020 Asheesh