Abdul Wahab Vs State of U.P.

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:173091

Court No. - 66

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 23186 of 2023

Applicant :- Abdul Wahab Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Anjani Kumar Raghuvanshi,Sujan Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶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.487 of 2022 at Police Station-Phase-III Noida, District-Gautam Budh Nagar under Sections 420, 386, 506, 120-B IPC. The applicant is in jail since 21.10.2022.

¶7

The first bail application of the applicant was rejected by this Court on 12.01.2023.

¶8

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

¶9

As per the prosecution case, the applicant was only responsible for installation of cameras.

¶10

The cameras were operated and footage were retrieved by the hotel manager and staff. They have not been investigated.

¶11

During the course of the investigation, no evidence to establish the applicant's role in capturing or retrieving the obscene footage was found.

¶12

The co-accused-Anuraj Kumar has been enlarged on bail by this Court on 19.01.2023 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.54344 of 2022. The applicant claims congruency in role and seeks parity in relief granted to the said co-accused-Pankaj Kumar.

¶13

This Court while granting bail to co-accused-Anurag Kumar has noticed the submission that the principal offender-Pankaj Kumar who was responsible for blackmailing the victim. The principal offender-Pankaj Kumar has also been enlarged on bail by this Court on 17.03.2023 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.55184 of 2022. The case of the applicant stands on a better footing than the said co-accused.

¶14

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

¶15

The trial is moving at a snail's pace and shows no signs of an early conclusion.

¶16

Inordinate delay in concluding trial has lead to an indefinite detention of the applicant without any evidence to implicate him in the offence. Right of the applicant to a speedy trial has been violated.

¶17

The applicant does not have any criminal history apart from this case.

¶18

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.

¶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-Abdul Wahab 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 :- 28.8.2023 Ashish Tripathi

¶24

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

Abdul Wahab v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abdul Wahab v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Raju Vs State of U.P.

Virendra Kumar Alka Vs State of U.P.

Aamir Vs State of U.P.

Farman Vs State of U.P.

Charan Singh Vs State of U.P.

Upendra Vs State of U.P.