Allahabad High Court
Sirajuddin vs State Of U.P. on 5 May, 2025
Author: Siddharth
Bench: Siddharth
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:71373 Court No. - 47 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6695 of 2025 Applicant :- Sirajuddin Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Gaurav Kakkar,Raghvendra Prakash Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Pavan Kumar Hon'ble Siddharth,J.
Heard Shri Gaurav Kakkar, learned counsel for the applicant; Shri Pavan Kumar, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A for the State.
There are allegations in the FIR that there is dispute between sister of informant with her husband, Sirajuddin (applicant) and co-accused, Islam Uddin (Jeth). Today, on 16.6.2022, sister of the informant had gone to meet her Aunt(Mausi) at the village where applicant saw her and started abusing her. He threatened the informant that he will make such condition of his sister that he will keep her in his house for life. On the same day at 8.30 P.M. when the sister of the informant and informant were returning from village, they were beaten by the aforesaid accused. On raising alarm passersby stopped and applicant and co-accused vanished after extending threats to them.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant has been falsely implicated under section 326-A I.P.C. From the injury report of the injured no such injury is apparent. He has submitted that in the first medical examination of victim at C.H.C., Chandpur only complaint of pain on account of injury found on the body of the injured was made. Injuries were found on her left shoulder and below the left ear. He has further submitted that six injuries were found by the doctor of C.H.C. Bijnor. No acid burn injury was found on the person of the injured.Doctor did not found any permanent or partial damage,or disfigurement or disablement of any part of the body of victim caused by throwing acid or administration of acid which is essential for implication under section 326-A I.P.C.He has further submitted that applicant has been falsely implicated because of earlier dispute between the parties.The applicant is in jail since 11.1.2025 and has criminal history of three cases to his credit, which has been explained in paragraph-48 of the bail application.
Learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and pointed to the statement of the doctor . Doctor has stated that in case of burn by acid there is possibility of deformation in face. He has stated that informant suffered simple injuries except injury no 1 and 2.
After hearing the rival contentions this court finds that applicant and victim are husband and wife. There is prior enmity between them. Victim is living in her parental home.Implication under section 326-A I.P.C. does not appears to be justified. Keeping in view of the injury report of the injured, applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.
Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties noted above, finding force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, recent judgment dated 11.07.2022 of the Apex Court in the case of Manish Sisodia vs. Directorate of Enforcement, 2024 LawSuit (SC) 677. and considering 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above their capacity by the under trials and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.
Let the applicant,Sirajuddin , involved in Case Crime No. 379 of 2022 , under Section-323,326-A,504,506 IPC, and section 3/4 Muslim Women(Protection of Rights on Marriage), Act, 2019 Police Station- Chandpur, District- Bijnor, 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 subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.
(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 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.
(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.
Order Date :- 5.5.2025 Atul kr. sri.