The court granted bail to the applicant in a criminal case, noting the delay in trial and overcrowding concerns, while directing the issuance of a personal bond and two surety bonds with specific conditions.
Released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of Rs. Two Lacs each.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 71
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 27153 of 2021
Applicant :- Usman Khan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Diwan Saifullah Khan,Abhishek Ankur Chaurasia Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.
Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of applicant, is taken on record.
This is the third bail application on behalf of applicant. The first bail application on behalf of applicant has been rejected by Hon'ble Mr. Justice Shailendra Kumar Agrawal, vide order dated 09.03.2018 and the second bail application of the applicant has been rejected by this Bench, vide order dated 29.01.2021.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA, appearing for the State and perused the material brought on record.
It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the second bail application of the applicant was rejected on 29.01.2021 and this Hon'ble Court was pleased to direct the trial court to conclude the trial within a period of six months from the date of production of a copy of the order dated 29.01.2021. It is further contended that the order dated 29.01.2021 was produced before the trial court on 18.02.2021 which find place in the order dated 03.03.2021 but till dated no any witnesses has been examined in this case while the applicant is in jail since 19.05.2017 without trial. A copy of order sheet of S.T. No. 1772 of 20217 arising out of Case Crime No. 386 of 2017 has been annexed as Annexure No. 1 to the supplementary affidavit. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused has also been touched upon at length. It has been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required. It has also been submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 19.05.2017. Criminal history of the applicant has been
duly explained in paragraph no. 15 of the affidavit accompanying the bail application.
Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer.
Courts have taken notice of the overcrowding of jails during the current pandemic situation (Ref.: Suo Motu Writ Petition (c) No. 1/2020, Contagion of COVID 19 Virus in prisons before the Supreme Court of India). These circumstances shall also be factored in while considering bail applications on behalf of accused persons.
Having heard the submissions of learned counsel of both sides, belated stage of trial, nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment, and larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh v. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 2 SCC 22 and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a case of bail.
Let applicant- Usman Khan , be released on bail in Case Crime No. 386 of 2017, under Section 364-A IPC, Police StationDakshin, District- Agra, on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of Rs. Two Lacs each (One should be of a family member) before the magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:-
The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by the court concerned and in case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.
It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case.
In case of breach of of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.
The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.
The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.
Order Date :- 16.9.2021 Arti
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant deserves bail given the belated stage of trial, nature of accusation, and lack of examined witnesses.
Whether the conditions of bail should be imposed on the applicant.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Dataram Singh v. State of U.P. and anotherFollowed¶12
Dataram Singh v. State of U.P. and another, (2018) 2 SCC 22 · Who else cites this
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Usman Khan
State of U.P.
Vivek Kumar Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
Vivek Kumar Singh
Parties & counsel
