Allowed

Shakir @ Shkir v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC12 Jan 2023BAIL/10398/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This single-judge court allowed the second bail application of an accused charged with murder and culpable homicide. Although expressly not expressing an opinion on the merits of the case, the court found a sufficient case for bail and granted release subject to strict conditions to ensure witness safety and trial attendance.

What did the court decide?

Accused released on bail with a personal bond of one heavy and two local sureties subject to strict conditions regarding witness tampering and appearance in court.

Shakir @ Shkir Vs State of U.P. — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 86

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 10398 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Shakir @ Shkir Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Purushottam Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Mayank Kumar Jain,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶6

The present bail application has been filed on behalf of applicant in Case Crime No. 13 of 2019, under Sections 323, 304, 34 IPC, Police Station Gadiya Rangin, District Shahjahanpur with the prayer to enlarge the applicants on bail.

¶7

This is the second bail application. The first bail application has already been rejected by coordinate bench of this Court vide order dated 09.12.2019 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 25181 of 2019, wherein it was directed to decide the aforesaid case crime number expeditiously, as early as possible in accordance law, if there is no legal impediment.

¶8

It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that there is no enmity between the applicant and the deceased. The incident had taken place between Shakir @ Shkir and Jumman and the role of applicant is only to finish the quarrel between Sakir and Jumman. Applicant has no active role in the said incident. He further argued that four years have elapsed, only statement of PW-1 Mukhtiyar witness of facts has been recorded on 05.12.2019 and there is no chance of concluding the trial in near future. It is further submitted that applicants are languishing in jail since 28.01.2019 having no criminal history and that in case they are released on bail, they will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.

¶9

Per contra, the learned Additional Government Advocate has opposed the prayer for grant of bail but he could not dispute the aforesaid aspect of the matter.

¶10

Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties, nature of evidence and all attending facts and circumstances of the case,

¶11

without expressing any opinion on 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 applicants- Shakir @ Shkir in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond of one heavy and two local sureties to the satisfaction of court concerned subject to the following conditions:

¶13

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

¶14

(2). The applicant will not influence any witness.

¶15

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

¶16

(4). 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.

¶17

(5). The applicant will not seek any adjournment when the witness is present in the Court. He shall be personally present before the Court on the date fixed for recording the statement under Section 313 Cr. P.C. After the statement recorded under section 313 Cr. P.C. , if applicant desires to adduce defense evidence either orally or documentary, he shall not seek any adjournment on the date fixed for defense evidence.

¶18

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

¶19

Order Date :- 12.1.2023 T.S.

¶20

Digitally signed by :- TRIBHUWAN SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Shakir @ Shkir v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shakir @ Shkir 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

Smt. Babli Vs State of U.P and 3 Others

Vipin Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Ravi Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Narednra Singh Vs State of U.P. through Secretary Home at Lucknow

Shadab @ Lala Vs State of U.P.

Zeeshan Vs State of U.P.and 3 Others