Allowed

Bilal v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC23 Feb 2022BAIL/37582/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under Sections 302, 120B IPC, the Allahabad High Court noted allegations of false implication and planted evidence. Considering jail overcrowding during the pandemic and the applicant's clean record, the court allowed the bail application.

What did the court decide?

The applicant was released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties subject to standard conditions regarding tampering with evidence and influence on witnesses.

Bilal Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 68

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 37582 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Bilal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sunil Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Vijit Saxena,Vinod Singh

¶4

Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.

¶5

Heard Shri Sunil Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Vijit Saxena, learned counsel for the informant and Shri I.P. Srivastava, learned AGA for the State.

¶6

A first information report was lodged against the applicant as Case Crime No. 221 of 2021 at Police Station- Khurja Nagar, District- Bulandshahar under Sections 302, 120B I.P.C.

¶7

The bail application of the applicant was rejected by learned Sessions Judge, Bulandshahar, on 30.07.2021.

¶8

The applicant is in jail since 21.03.2021, pursuant to the said F.I.R.

¶9

Shri Sunil Kumar, learned counsel for applicant contends that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. The applicant did not have any motive to commit the crime. The motive even as per the prosecution case has been ascribed only to Gulfam and Yunus. The recitals in the F.I.R. that the informant and the family members reached the site where the body

¶10

found is false. The inquest report was drawn up by the police authorities on a radio communication sent by the control room to the concerned police station prior to the lodgement of the F.I.R. The custody of the body was taken by the police authorities immediately thereafter. Neither the applicant nor his family members were witnesses in the inquest report. The recovery of a cycle was planted on the applicant alongwith the other coaccused persons only to burnish credentials of the police investigators. The recovery is unreliable and cannot be connected with the crime. The recovery memo which was created at the site of the incident where the dead body was recovered depicts the presence of empty liquor bottles, snacks and with three disposable glasses. There is all likelihood that the deceased had consumed liquor with some persons and was killed in a drunken brawl. The eye witness was introduced belatedly whose statement was taken out by the investigation officer twenty days after the incident. The delay in recording the statement is unjustifiable and discredits the police investigation. Apart from the instant case the applicant does not have any criminal history. Lastly it is contended by the learned counsel for applicant 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

Shri I.P. Srivastava, learned AGA for the State and Shri

¶12

Vijit Saxena, learned counsel for the informant could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. Learned AGA for the State does not dispute the fact that the applicant does not have any criminal history apart from the instant case.

¶13

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.

¶14

I see merit in the submissions of the learned counsel for the applicant and 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- Bilal be released on bail in Case Crime No. 221 of 2021 at Police Station- Khurja Nagar, District- Bulandshahar under Sections 302, 120B I.P.C., on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions.

¶17

The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶18

The applicant will not influence any witness.

¶19

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

¶20

The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any 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 conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.

¶22

Order Date :- 23.2.2022 Dhananjai

¶23

Digitally signed by DHANANJAI Date: 2022.02.24 13:49:34 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Bilal v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bilal 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

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Aasif Vs State of U.P.

Aman Soni @ Ravi Soni Vs State of U.P and Another

Munni Devi Vs State of U.P.

Haji Shan Mohammad @ Janu Vs State of U.P.

Usha Verma Vs State of U.P.

Munni Lal Chauhan Vs State of U.P.