Single judge allowed bail to Shakeel @ Baba in a homicide case after noting significant incarceration and referring to Apex Court guidelines on speedy trial, enforcing conditions to prevent tampering with evidence.
Release on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two heavy and local sureties to the satisfaction of concerned court.
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.
Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:127002
Court No. - 69
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 17368 of 2018
Applicant :- Shakeel @ Baba Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ravindra Sharma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Mayank Kumar Jain,J.
dated 15.03.2021, 26.05.2021, 26.08.2021, 30.09.2022, 16.11.2022 and 17.01.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos.38385 of 2020, 20418 of 2021, 22778 of 2021, 29978 of 2016, 44208 of 2021 and 54401 of 2022. Learned counsel for applicant lastly submits that applicant is in jail since 05.02.2016 and that in case applicant is enlarged on bail, applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail.The criminal history of the applicant has been explained in paragraph-4 of the supplementary affidavit.
"15. This Court has clarified in numerous judgments that the liberty guaranteed by Part III of the Constitution would cover within its protective ambit not only due procedure and fairness but also access to justice and a speedy trial. In Supreme Court Legal Aid Committee v. Union of India SCC para-15 it was held that undertrials cannot indefinitely be detained pending trial. Ideally, no person ought to suffer adverse consequences of his acts unless the same is established before a neutral arbiter. However, owing to the practicalities of real life where to secure an effective trial and to ameliorate the risk to society in case a potential criminal is left at large pending trial, the Courts are tasked with deciding whether an individual ought to be released pending trial or not. Once it is obvious that a timely trial would not be possible and the accused has suffered incarceration for a significant period of time, Courts would ordinarily be obligated to enlarge them on bail."
(1). The applicant will not tamper with the prosecution evidence during the trial.
(2). The applicant will not influence any witness.
(3). The applicant will appear before the trial Court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.
(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.
Order Date :- 15.6.2023 Prajapati
Digitally signed by :- RAMKESH PRAJAPATI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a case for bail has been made out considering the length of incarceration and the submissions made by the applicant.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Union of India Vs. K.A. NajeebReferred¶13
Union of India Vs. K.A. Najeeb (2021) 3 SCC 713 · Who else cites this
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Shakeel @ Baba
State of U.P.
Mayank Kumar Jain
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
