Single-judge court granted bail in a charge sheet case under Section 307 IPC. The applicant, a first-time offender detained since 2019, argued no malice in past absconding. The court relied on Dataram Singh and the larger mandate of Article 21.
Prayer for bail granted; applicant released on personal bond and two sureties subject to specific conditions.
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. - 44
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8372 of 2021
Applicant :- Shahbaaz Khan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ankit Kapoor Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Shamim Ahmed,J.
Heard Sri Ankit Kapoor, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State. Perused the record.
Applicant has moved the present bail application seeking bail in Case Crime No.170 of 2010, under Section 307 I.P.C. P.S.Sigra, District-Varanasi.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the allegations against the applicant is that he used knife blow in causing the injury on the neck of the injured. According to the medical examination report the injured has sustained three injuries. Injury no.1 is incised wound on the right side of neck, the injury no.2 is multiple abrasion and the injury no.3 is abraded contusion. The injuries no.1 has not been kept under observation and advised for x-ray but supplementary medical examination report shows that there was no internal damage and the applicant has no previous criminal history and this Hon'ble Court vide order dated 22.09.2010 granted bail to the applicant in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.-25240 of 2010. Thereafter the applicant being the sole bread earner of his family went to earn some livelihood and could not appear before the Court below for about 2 1/2 years as he could not get information about the date fixed by his advocate and therefore he could not appear before the Court below and thereafter he was again arrested on 19.09.2013 and this Hon'ble Court vide order dated 11.12.2013 again granted him bail in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 37698 of 2013.
Now, the present bail application has been moved on the ground that he could not get information about the date fixed from his counsel hence, he could not appear before the Court below on the date fixed. There was no any malafide intention for not appearing before the Court below and ultimately he was arrested again on 6.10.2019 and since then he is in jail. Learned counsel for the applicant assured that in future he will not abscond and he shall appear on each and every date fixed before the Court below and prays that he may be enlarged on
bail.
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 have 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 and is also ready to accept all the conditions which the Court may deem fit to impose upon him. It has also been pointed out that the accused is not having any criminal history and he is in jail since 6.10.2019 and that in the wake of heavy pendency of cases in the Court, there is no likelihood of any early conclusion of trial.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail application.
After perusing the record in the light of the submissions made at the bar and after taking an overall view of all the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence, the period of detention already undergone, the unlikelihood of early conclusion of trial and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence and the larger mandate of Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh vs. State of UP and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22, this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.
The prayer for bail is granted. The application is allowed.
Let the applicant- Shahbaj involved in Case Crime No.170 of 2010, under Section 307 I.P.C. P.S.- Sigra, District-Varanasi be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned on the following conditions :-
(1) The applicant will not make any attempt to tamper with the prosecution evidence in any manner whatsoever.
(2) The applicant will personally appear on each and every date in the court and his personal presence shall not be exempted unless the court itself deems it fit to do so in the interest of justice.
(3) The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.
(4) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.
(5) The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad or certified copy issued from the Registry of the High Court, Allahabad.
(6) The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of the High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.
It may be observed that in the event of any breach of the aforesaid conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to proceed for the cancellation of applicant's bail.
It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of the bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case.
Order Date :- 7.6.2021 Neeraj
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to bail under Section 307 IPC considering the gravity of the offence, period of detention, and lack of tampering risk.
Whether the applicant's inability to appear in earlier proceedings due to lack of information affects the current bail consideration.
What conditions should be imposed upon the grant of bail.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Dataram Singh vs. State of UP and anotherRelied on¶12
Dataram Singh vs. State of UP and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 · Who else cites this
Shahbaaz Khan
State of U.P.
Shamim Ahmed
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
