Allowed

Azeem v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC13 Sept 2018BAIL/28893/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment grants bail to an applicant accused of murder and attempting murder. The court held that while the punishment is severe and there are grounds for apprehending witness tampering, the applicant is entitled to release on bail subject to strict conditions regarding presence in court and conduct.

What did the court decide?

Release of the applicant on bail with a personal bond of Rs. One lac with two family sureties each in like amount, subject to strict conditions of presence and conduct.

Azeem Vs State of U.P. — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 59

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 28893 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Azeem Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Imran Mabood Khan,Sunil Kumar Mishra

¶4

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Meraj Ahmad Khan

¶5

Hon'ble Suneet Kumar,J.

¶6

Counter affidavit filed by Sri Meraj Ahmed Khan, learned counsel for the informant is taken on record.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Meraj Ahmed Khan, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. appearing for the State and perused the record.

¶8

As per the prosecution case, the deceased along with his wife was ambushed by nine nominated persons; three accused persons including Bheemu have been assigned the role of causing firearm injury to the deceased; postmortem report shows single gun shot injury; the eye-witness account has assigned the role of firing to co-accused Bheemu. It is urged by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated; there is no evidence against the applicant; no recovery of the weapon used in the commission of the offence has been made from the applicant; applicant having no other reported criminal antecedent is languishing in jail since 30.4.2018.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶10

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 tampering 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.

¶11

Let the applicant- Azeem involved in Case Crime No. 441 of 2018, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 302, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Sardhana, District Meerut be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. One lac with two sureties

¶12

(one should be of his family members) each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶13

(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.

¶14

(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.

¶15

(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.

¶16

(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

¶17

Order Date :- 13.9.2018 S.Prakash

Azeem v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Azeem v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rajendra Yadav Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Mohd. Faheem Vs State of U.P.

Nawab Vs State of U.P.

Pradum Singh Vs State of U.P.

Waseem Vs State of U.P.

Smt. Mithlesh Sharma Vs State of U.P.