Allowed

Mahrazuddin @ Babu v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC25 Aug 2023BAIL/18559/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court granted bail to the applicant in a criminal application under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 323, and 452 IPC, holding that arguments regarding lack of credible evidence and delay in trial were not satisfactorily refuted by the prosecution.

What did the court decide?

The applicant was to be released on bail furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount, with conditions to not tamper with evidence and to appear before the trial court.

Mahrazuddin @ Babu Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:171697

¶2

Court No. - 66

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 18559 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Mahrazuddin @ Babu Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Yogendra Pal Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Akash Tomar

¶5

Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.

¶6

By means of the second bail application the applicant has prayed to be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No.322 of 2022 at Police Station-Bhawanpur, District-Meerut under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 323, 452 IPC. The applicant is in jail since 18.09.2022.

¶7

The first bail application of the applicant was rejected by this Court on 13.01.2023.

¶8

The following arguments made by Shri Yogendra Pal Singh, learned counsel on behalf of the applicant, which could not be satisfactorily refuted by Shri Akash Tomar, learned counsel for the informant and Shri Paritosh Kumar Malviya, learned AGA-I from the record, entitle the applicant for grant of bail:

¶9

The injured has not identified the applicant as the principal offender who inflicted the gun shots injuries on the person of the injured.

¶10

The case of the applicant is distinguishable from the principal offenders-Aamir and Shahazad who killed the deceased by discharging their firearms.

¶11

The nature of other injuries shows that there was no intent to kill.

¶12

The applicant is a law abiding citizen who cooperated in the investigations and has joined the trial proceedings.

¶13

The trial is moving at a snail's pace and shows no signs of an early conclusion. The applicant is not responsible for the delay in the trial.

¶14

Inordinate delay in the trial will lead to indefinite imprisonment of the applicant without their being any credible evidence to implicate him in the offence. Right of the applicant to a speedy trial has been violated.

¶15

The applicant is not a flight risk. The applicant being a law abiding citizen has always cooperated with the investigation and undertakes to cooperate with the court proceedings. There is no possibility of his influencing witnesses, tampering with the evidence or reoffending.

¶16

Learned AGA points out that the applicant has not disclosed some criminal cases in the bail application.

¶17

Rejoining the issue and relying on the instructions received by the learned A.G.A., Shri Yogendra Pal Singh, learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant is a poor person who is in jail. The applicant does not have an effective pairokar. Hence the details of the said cases could not be searched out and stated in the bail application in the first instance. However, from the records available with the AGA and on instructions

¶18

obtained from the applicant, it is contended that the applicant is a convenient scapegoat for the police to falsely implicate him in the said cases only to show the proficiency of the police investigators. The said criminal cases have no bearing on the instant case.

¶19

In the light of the preceding discussion and without making any observations on the merits of the case, the bail application is allowed.

¶20

Let the applicant-Mahrazuddin @ Babu be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number, on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below. The following conditions be imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶21

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence or influence any witness during the trial.

¶22

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

¶23

Order Date :- 25.8.2023 Ashish Tripathi

¶24

Digitally signed by :- ASHISH NAYAN TRIPATHI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Mahrazuddin @ Babu v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mahrazuddin @ Babu 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Amarjeet Barnwal Vs State of U.P.

Devendra Vs State of U.P.

Satish Kumar Kaushal Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Khanna Yadav Vs State of U.P.

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

Basanti Devi Vs State of U.P.