Shakeel Ahamad Vs State of U.P.

Court No. - 71

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3435 of 2020

Applicant :- Shakeel Ahamad Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Bhuvnesh Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ronak

¶4

Hon'ble Rajendra Kumar-IV,J.

¶5

Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of applicant is taken on record.

¶6

Heard Sri Bhuvnesh Kumar Singh, learned Counsel for applicant, learned AGA for State as well as Sri Ronak Chaturvedi, learned Counsel for Informant and perused the material available on record.

¶7

Accused-applicant, involved in Case Crime No.848 of 2019, under Sections 147, 323, 324, 325, 307, 34 I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali City, District Bijnor, applied for bail.

¶8

Learned Counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case by the informant due to enmity. He has committed no offence. Prosecution story is false and fake. There are general allegations against the accused persons. Injured Laik Ahmad has received eight injuries on his persons out of which injury nos.6 and 7 have been caused by hard object on the parietal region, injury nos. 1 and 5 caused by hard and blunt object and others are simple in nature whereas role of the applicant is assigned with lathi. Applicant is in jail since 09.12.2019. It is further submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant's fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses. In case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail. Due to heavy pendency of cases in the Court, there is no possibility of early conclusion of the trial. Lastly it has been submitted that co-accused persons, namely, Mohd. Afzal, Arshad and Shadman @ Shannu have already been granted bail on 17.01.2020 by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Criminal Misc. Case No.56137 of 2019.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. as well as learned Counsel for informant have opposed the prayer for bail but did not disputed the factual submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant and submitted that nature of the injuries is grievous, therefore, the bail application may be rejected.

¶10

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, rival contention of learned counsel for the parties, detention of applicant in jail, severity of punishment in case of conviction and without commenting upon the merit of the case, applicant deserves bail.

¶11

Accordingly, bail application is allowed.

¶12

Let applicant Shakeel Ahamad be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties and filing an undertaking to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions:-

¶13

The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.

¶14

The applicant shall co-operate with the trial and shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for charge, evidence when the witnesses are present in the court, statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and argument.

¶15

During trial, he shall not indulge in any criminal activities or case.

¶16

In breach of any condition enumerated above, Trial Court shall be at liberty to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.

¶17

Order Date :- 29.1.2020 I.A.Siddiqui

Shakeel Ahamad v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shakeel Ahamad v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rishipal Singh @ Sunil Vs State of U.P.

Hetram Vs State of U.P.

Amit Kumar @ Dablu Vs State of U.P.

Rajkumar Vs State of U.P.

Kalu Vs State of U.P.

Yogesh Vs State of U.P.