# Ali Mohammad v. The State of U.P. Opp. Party

- **Citation:** (2015) 2 ILRA 540
- **Court:** High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
- **Decided:** 2015-04-30
- **Case number:** Bail No. 8441 of 2014
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/ali-mohammad-v-the-state-of-u-p-opp-party-43157
- **Pages:** 2

## Headnote

Cr.P.C.-Section-439-Bail-offence
under
Section 498-a/304-B IPC-applicant being
father-in-law
of
deceased
considering
general allegation-no dying declarationsentitled for conditional bail.

## Text

540
 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
6. Learned A.G.A. takes an objection
to this prayer being made by the informant
himself for quashing of the FIR on the
ground that if the allegations in the FIR are
found to be false, then there is a likelihood of
the petitioner himself being prosecuted and
this action or process can be undertaken by
the court upon a police report being filed in
the matter and not before that. In the
aforesaid circumstances, he contends that the
petitioner, who is the informant, has no locus
to get the FIR quashed in the aforesaid
background and even otherwise it is the
responsibility of the State now to find out
through its Investigating Agency as to
whether any cognizable offence has been
committed or not which is liable to be dealt
with and punishment awarded in terms of the
provisions of the Code of Criminal
Procedure as well as the Indian Penal Code.
7. We have given our thoughtful
consideration
to
this
peculiar
circumstance and it prima facie appears
that the petitioner is now praying to save
the honour of his family after this
incidence has taken place as well as
protect the future of his daughter.
8.
In the aforesaid circumstances,
the petitioner appears to have moved an
application
before
the
Senior
Superintendent of Police. Learned A.G.A.
therefore is right in his submissions that it
is now for the Investigating Officer to
submit his report keeping in view the
provisions of Section 157 read with
Section 158 Cr.P.C. coupled with the
report which might be submitted finally
under
Section
173(2)
Cr.P.C.
The
contention, therefore, is that if the closure
of the case is warranted in the background
aforesaid, the same has to be attempted
through the aforesaid agency and the
procedure prescribed in law.
9.
Apart from this, we also find it
necessary that since a report has been alleged
disclosing a cognizable offence then before
any such report is submitted or accepted by
the court concerned, it would be appropriate
that the statement of the victim is also
recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C.
10.
We, therefore, direct that the
statement of the victim should be recorded
before the court below under Section 164
Cr.P.C. and thereafter it will be open to the
court concerned to pass appropriate orders in
the background aforesaid, if warranted on the
facts of the present case for closure.
11. Disposed of with the said
observations.
--------
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL SIDE
DATED: LUCKNOW 30.04.2015
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE RAMESH SINHA, J.
Bail No. 8441 of 2014
Ali Mohammad
 ...Applicant
Versus
The State of U.P.
...Opp. Party
Counsel for the Applicant:
Ran Vijay Singh
Counsel for the Opp. Party:
Govt. Advocate
Cr.P.C.-Section-439-Bail-offence
under
Section 498-a/304-B IPC-applicant being
father-in-law
of
deceased
considering
general allegation-no dying declarationsentitled for conditional bail.
(Delivered by Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha, J.)
1. Heard Sri Ran Vijay Singh,
learned counsel for the applicant and Sri
2 All] Ali Mohammad Vs. The State of U.P.
541
Alok Mohan Upadhyay, learned A.G.A.
appearing for the State.
2. It has been contended by the learned
counsel for the applicant that the applicant is
the father-in-law of the deceased. The
marriage between the deceased and applicant's
son, namely, Akbar Ali was solemnized in the
year 2013. Only general allegation has been
levelled against the applicant. There is no
dying declaration against the applicant. The
husband of the deceased is in jail. The
applicant has no other reported criminal
antecedent. The applicant is in jail.
3. Learned A.G.A. opposed the
prayer for bail.
4. Without expressing any opinion
on the merits of the case and considering
the nature of accusation and the severity
of punishment in case of conviction and
the
nature
of
supporting
evidence,
reasonable apprehension of tempering of
the witnesses and prima facie satisfaction
of the Court in support of the charge, the
applicant is entitled to be released on bail
in this case.
5.
Let the applicant Ali Mohammad
involved in Case Crime No. 686 of 2013
under Sections 498-A/304-B I.P.C., police
station Kotwali Sadar, District Unnao be
released on bail on his furnishing a personal
bond with two sureties each in the like
amount to the satisfaction of the court
concerned with the following conditions.
(i) 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.
(ii) 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.
(iii) 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.
(iv)
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.
6. The case of the applicant is
distinguishable from co-accused Akbar
Ali.
--------
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 28.04.2015
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MANOJ MISRA, J.
Application U/S 482 No. 11323 of 2015
Santosh Sharma
 ...Applicant
Versus
State of U.P. & Anr.
..Opp. Parties