Jahir Ali @ Jahid Ansari Vs State of U.P.

Court No. - 16

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5809 of 2020

Applicant :- Jahir Ali @ Jahid Ansari Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Raj Kiran Chaudhary,Jai Prakash Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.

¶5

Vakaltnama filed by Sri Satish Kumar Shukla on behalf of the first informant is taken on record.

¶6

Heard Sri Jai Prakash Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Satish Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the first informant and the learned A.G.A.

¶7

This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant, Jahir Ali @ Jahid Ansari , seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 291 of 2019, under Sections 364, 302, 394, 201, 411 I.P.C., registered at P.S. Mirzamurad, District Varanasi.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant is not named in the F.I.R. Two persons namely Raju and Prahlad Patel have been named in the F.I.R. Subsequently, on the information of informer the two named accused persons were apprehended and a pick-up vehicle and mobile phone was recovered along with a blood stained stone alleged to have been used in the incident. The name of the applicant has surfaced in the statement of the co-accused persons. There is no recovery of any incriminating material either from the possession or pointing out of the applicant. There is a recovery of a country made pistol from the applicant but the same was not used in the offence as is also evident from the post mortem report in which the cause of death is due to the fracture of the temporal bone and rib. The said weapon does not in any manner gets connected in the incident. The applicant is in jail since 20.09.2019 having no criminal history.

¶9

Per contra learned A.G.A opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the arguments raised by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶10

Let the applicant, Jahir Ali @ Jahid Ansari , be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are

¶11

being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶12

i) The applicant will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever.

¶13

ii) The applicant will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.

¶14

(iii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the date 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.

¶15

(iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever. 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., may be issued and if 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 I.P.C.

¶16

(V) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) 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 and the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229A IPC.

¶17

(vi) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the applicant.

¶18

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.

¶19

Order Date :- 14.2.2020 AS Rathor

¶20

(Samit Gopal,J.)

Jahir Ali @ Jahid Ansari v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jahir Ali @ Jahid Ansari 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

Anil Kumar @ Munshi Dhuriya Vs State of U.P.

Santosh Patel Vs State of U.P.

Ajeet Vs State of U.P.

Sarvesh Shukla Vs State of U.P.

Munesh Kumar @ Lalla Vs State of U.P.

Premchandra Patel Vs State of U.P.