Allowed

Ali Hasan v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC16 Jan 2019BAIL/48554/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court granted bail to the applicant, Ali Hasan, in a criminal case involving murder, abetment, and affray. The court found it a fit case for bail without commenting on the merits, subject to conditions of cooperation and no unlawful activity.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each, subject to specified conditions of cooperation and conduct.

Ali Hasan Vs State of U.P. — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 45

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 48554 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Ali Hasan Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rajeev Kumar Singh Parmar,Ram Babu Sharma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ved Prakash Pandey

¶4

Hon'ble Harsh Kumar,J.

¶5

Counter affidavits filed by learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the first informant and rejoinder affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant, are taken on record.

¶6

Heard Sri Ram Babu Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Rama Shanker Mishra and Abrar Ahmad Siddiqui, learned counsel for the first informant, learned A.G.A. and perused the record.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant contends that applicant has been falsely implicated along with co-accused persons; that as per averments made in F.I.R. lodged at 11:32 p.m. on 14.6.2018 by Shamsher, applicant and 9 others armed with fire arms on account of old enmity fired at his nephew Ramzan, Cousin Ahmad and nephew Kasim with intention to cause their death in which Ramzan, Ahmad and Kasim sustained fire arm injuries and were taken to District Hospital, Shahjahanpur; that after lodging of F.I.R. under Section 307 I.P.C. injured Ramzan is alleged to have died and Section 302 I.P.C. has been added; that post-mortem report of deceased at Annexure-2 states five stitched wounds and also states that deceased was brought dead at District Hospital, Shahjahanpur; that eye witnesses mentioned in F.I.R. have not assigned any specific role to applicant and first informant or injured witnesses have also not assigned any specific role to applicant; that applicant had no motive to cause death of Ramzan; that at the time of incident co-accused Wahid and Zafar were allegedly armed with their licensed fire arms rifle and double barrel gun; that case of applicant is distinguishable from Wahid and Zafar; that applicant has no criminal history, however, after implicating him in this case gangster has been slapped on him; that applicant undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty of bail; that applicant is in custody since 27.6.2018.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the first informant vehemently opposed the prayer of bail and contended that as many as 10 assailants caused indiscriminate firing on deceased and two others causing multiple fire arm wounds to all of them and deceased also sustained five gun shot wounds resulting in

¶9

his death during treatment at District Hospital, Shahjahanpur; that there is eye witness account of the incident and it is clear that as many as 10 persons surrounded the deceased and injured persons and committed indiscriminate firing.

¶10

Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, perusal of record and considering the complicity of accused, severity of punishment as well as totality of facts and circumstances, at this stage without commenting on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail.

¶11

Let the applicant Ali Hasan be released on bail in Case Crime No.344 of 2018, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 307, 506 I.P.C. and Section 27 Arms Act and Section 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1932, P.S. Kant, District Shahjahanpur, on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:-

¶12

(i) The applicant will co-operate with the trial and remain present personally on each and every date fixed for framing of charge, recording of evidence as well as recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. or through counsel on other dates and in case of absence without sufficient cause, it will be deemed that he is abusing the liberty of bail enabling the court concerned to take necessary action in accordance with the provisions of Section 82 Cr.P.C. or Sections 174A and 229A I.P.C.

¶13

(ii) The applicant will not tamper with the prosecution evidence and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.

¶14

(iii) The applicant will not indulge in any unlawful activities.

¶15

The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

¶16

Order Date :- 16.1.2019 Kpy

Ali Hasan v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ali Hasan 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

Shiv Ram @ Tillan @ Dhillan Vs State of U.P.

Veeru @ Virendra Gangwar Vs State of U.P.

Tapasya @ Tabassum Vs State of U.P.

Dhanpat Vs State of U.P.

Akash Vs State of U.P.

Gudun Saroj Vs State of U.P.