Allowed

Mehboob v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC29 Aug 2022BAIL/5342/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal miscellaneous bail application, the Court allowed bail to an applicant charged with murder and attempt to murder. Despite allegations of complicity, the Court granted bail with personal bond and sureties, imposing strict conditions regarding appearance and non-interference with witnesses, directing the trial court to conclude the trial within one year.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail furnishing personal bond and two sureties subject to strict conditions including absence without cause, non-tampering with evidence, and prosecution in accordance with law S

Mehboob Vs State of U.P. — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 69

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5342 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Mehboob Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Deepak Kumar,Bhavya Sahai,Mohd.Sartaz Ahmad Siddiqui Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Brijesh Sahai, learned Senior Counsel for the applicant assisted by Sri Bhavya Sahai, learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A for the State.

¶6

This is a second bail application of the applicant.

¶7

The first bail application of the applicant was rejected by the order dated 16.05.2019 by a coordinate Bench of this court which is not available now.

¶8

There is allegation of murder against the applicant in the FIR along with co-accused, Gulbahar. There is allegation in the FIR that the co-accused, Gulbahar, has fired upon the left side chest of the deceased and the applicant on the right side of the chest.

¶9

Learned Senior counsel for the applicant has pointed out in the statement of P.W-1 recorded before the trial court where he has exonerated the applicant of any role in the alleged offence. The applicant is in jail since 08.09.2017 and has no criminal history to his credit.

¶10

On the other hand learned A.G.A has opposed the prayer for bail.

¶11

Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 and recent judgment dated 11.07.2022 of the Apex Court in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil vs. C.B.I., passed in S.L.P (Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶12

Let the applicant, Mehboob, involved in Case Crime No. 452 of

¶13

2017, under Sections- 307, 302, 34 IPC, Police StationSeohara, District- Bijnor, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶14

(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.

¶15

(ii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in Court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶16

(iii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶17

(iv) In case the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation then the Trial Court shall initiate proceedings against him in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶18

(v) The applicant shall remain present in person before the Trial Court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the Trial Court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶19

In case, of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶20

Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

¶21

Trial court is directed to conclude the trial of the applicant as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of one year.

¶22

Order Date :- 29.8.2022 Rohit

¶23

Digitally signed by ROHIT DAS Date: 2022.08.30 13:16:04 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Mehboob v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mehboob 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dileep Verma Vs Union of India

Rajkishore Dwivedi Vs State of Up through Secretary Home U.P. Lucknow

Mohit Kumar Yadav Vs State of U.P. through Secretary Home

Jitendra Vs State of U.P.and Another

Golu Alias Ajay Vs State of U.P and 3 Others

Hari Shankar Yadav Vs State of U.P.