Allowed

Jabir @ Jakir v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC25 Nov 2021BAIL/28643/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court allowed bail application for applicant falsely implicated in assault case, noting inordinate delay in FIR lodgement, lack of criminal history, and pandemic-related jail overcrowding, releasing him on personal bond and sureties.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail on personal bond and two sureties each in like amount. Conditions imposed against tampering with evidence, influencing witnesses, and ensuring appearance.

Jabir @ Jakir Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 66

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 28643 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Jabir @ Jakir Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sushil Kumar Pandey,Satyendra Narayan Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Jagdish Prasad Mishra

¶4

Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Nasrul Islam Jafri, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Ms. Nasira Adil, learned counsel and Sri Mohd. Saqlain learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Jagdish Prasad Mishra, learned counsel for the information and Sri Amit Kumar, learned brief holder for the State.

¶6

A first information report was lodged against the applicant as Case Crime No. 0165 of 2021 at Police Station-Bhopa District Muzaffarnagar on 25.05.2021 under Sections 323, 308, 504, 506 IPC.

¶7

The bail application of the applicant was rejected by learned Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Muzaffarnagar on 07.07.2021.

¶8

The applicant is in jail since 22.06.2021, pursuant to the said F.I.R.

¶9

Sri Nasrul Islam Jafri, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Ms. Nasira Adil, learned counsel and Sri Mohd. Saqlain learned

¶10

counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. The FIR was lodged 13 days after the incident. There is no reasonable explanation for the inordinate delay in lodgement of the FIR. The FIR is an afterthought and has been lodged to falsely implicate the applicant. Only a general role has been assigned to four accused persons named in the FIR. Applicant claims congruence in role and seeks parity in relief granted to the coaccused Sakir and Sazid who have already been granted bail. The applicant does not have criminal history apart from this case. Lastly it is submitted by Sri Nasrul Islam Jafri, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Ms. Nasira Adil, learned counsel and Sri Mohd. Saqlain learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant shall not abscond, and will fully cooperate in the criminal law proceedings. The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence nor influence the witnesses in any manner.

¶11

Sri Jagdish Prasad Mishra, learned counsel for the information and Sri Amit Kumar, learned brief holder for the State could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.

¶12

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

¶13

before the Supreme Court of India ). These circumstances shall also be factored in while considering bail applications on behalf of accused persons.

¶14

I see merit in the submissions of Sri Sri Nasrul Islam Jafri, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Ms. Nasira Adil, learned counsel and Sri Mohd. Saqlain learned counsel for the applicant and accordingly hold that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶15

In the light of the preceding discussion and without making any observations on the merits of the case, the bail application is allowed.

¶16

Let the applicant- Jabir @ Jakir be released on bail in Case Crime No. 165 of 2021 at Police Station-Bhopa District Muzaffarnagar under Sections 323, 308, 504, 506 IPC, on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below. The following conditions be imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶17

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶18

(ii) The applicant will not influence any witness.

¶19

(iii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶20

(iv) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶21

In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.

¶22

Order Date :- 25.11.2021/Nadeem

Jabir @ Jakir v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jabir @ Jakir 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rajendra Prasad Vs State of U.P.

Mehraj Vs State of U.P.

Vikram @ Veetu Vs State of U.P.

Brijesh Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Deepak Batham Vs State of U.P.

Shueb Vs State of U.P.