Dismissed

Imran v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC15 Jul 2022BAIL/5191/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application regarding a fatal fire-arm case, the High Court dismissed the application noting the applicant was the principal offender. The Court directed the trial court to conclude the trial within one year and imposed strict measures for witness attendance.

What did the court decide?

Bail application dismissed; trial directed to conclude within one year; strict coercive measures for witnesses ordered.

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

¶1

Court No. - 70

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5191 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Imran Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ajay Kumar Pandey,A Kumar Srivastava,Ratnesh Srivastava,Sheshadri Trivedi,Sr. Advocate Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Adesh Kumar

¶4

Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.

¶5

Heard Shri Ajay Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Adesh Kumar, learned counsel for the informant and Shri Paritosh Kumar Malviya, learned AGA for the State.

¶6

The applicant has been identified as the principal offender who discharged his fire arm and inflicted the sole fatal fire arm injury on the deceased by the eye witnesses to the incident. From the perusal of the material, it appears that the fire continued for some time and the eye witnesses reached the spot upon hearing the gunshots. The fire did not cease even when the eye witnesses appeared at the spot and hence were able to witness the killing of the deceased. The offence is grave. From the material available in the record, there is likelihood that the applicant committed the offence. The case of the applicant is distinguishable from other co-accused persons who have been enlarged on bail. At this stage, no case for bail is made out.

¶7

Without going into the merits of the case, the bail application is dismissed.

¶8

Interest of justice will be served by directing the learned trial court to expedite the trial within a stipulated period of time.

¶9

The trial court is directed to conclude the trial within a period of one year from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. The learned trial court shall proceed with the hearing on a day to day basis to ensure that the above stipulated timeline of one year is strictly adhered to. All witnesses also are directed to cooperate with the trial proceedings.

¶10

The learned trial court shall promptly take out all strict coercive measures against all the witnesses in accordance with law who fail to appear in the trial proceeding.

¶11

Police and administrative authorities of the State are also directed to ensure that the coercive measures adopted by the court are given effect to in a scrupulous manner to ensure the presence of the witnesses on the appointed date before the trial court.

¶12

The trial judge shall submit a monthly report on the progress of trial before the learned District Judge to ensure that the trial is concluded within the above stipulated period of time.

¶13

Order Date :- 15.7.2022 Dhananjai

¶14

Digitally signed by DHANANJAI Date: 2022.07.15 17:10:13 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Imran v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Imran 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

Ramdev Vs State of U.P. and Another

Dabaloo Kumar Bharti Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Jitendra Vs State of U.P.

Munna Lal @ Rama Shankar Vs State of U.P.

Tinku Vs State of U.P.

Neeraj Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others