Allowed

Aabid Khan @ Munna v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC20 Feb 2023BAIL/4974/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court Court No. 74 allowed bail in a criminal case involving IPC offences where the applicant claimed fabrication. The court directed the trial court to conclude the trial within two years and enforce strict coercive measures for witness attendance.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail by furnishing personal bond and two sureties in the like amount. Trial to be concluded within two years.

Aabid Khan @ Munna Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 74

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4974 of 2023

¶3

Applicant :- Aabid Khan @ Munna Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Kamal Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.

¶5

By means of this bail application the applicant has prayed to be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No. 599 of 2022 at Police Station Kotwali Orai, District Jalaun under Sections 457, 380, 411, 34 I.P.C. The applicant is in jail since 12.11.2022.

¶6

The bail application of the applicant was rejected by learned trial court on 22.12.2022.

¶7

The following arguments made by Shri Kamal Singh, 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:

¶8

(1). Ornaments were planted on the applicant to implicate him in the instant case to burnish the credentials of the police investigators and to deflect attention from the principal offender who are influential people.

¶9

(2). There is no independent witness to the recovery.

¶10

(3). Recovered items cannot be linked with the crime.

¶11

(4). No forensic science laboratory report drawn up in accordance with the latest scientific protocol by experts which confirms that the metallic substances were made of precious metal has been produced.

¶12

(5). Prosecution evidence does not connect the applicant with the offence.

¶13

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

¶14

(7). 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.

¶15

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

¶16

Let the applicant- Aabid Khan @ Munna 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:-

¶17

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

¶18

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

¶19

However, considering the facts and circumstances, the trial court is directed to conclude the trial within a period of two years from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. The learned trial court shall proceed with the hearing on a day to day basis to ensure that the above stipulated timeline of two years is strictly adhered to. All witnesses and counsels are directed to cooperate with the trial proceedings.

¶20

The trial court has also to be conscious of the rights of the accused persons and is under obligation of law to ensure that all expeditious, necessary and coercive measures as per law are adopted to ensure the presence of witnesses. Counsels or parties who delay or impede the proceedings should not only be discouraged from doing so but in appropriate cases exemplary costs should also be imposed on such parties/ counsel.

¶21

The learned trial court shall promptly take out all strict coercive measures against all the witnesses in

¶22

accordance with law who fail to appear in the trial proceeding. Counsels or parties who delay or impede the proceedings should not only be discouraged from doing so but in appropriate cases exemplary costs should also be imposed on such parties/ counsel.

¶23

Police and administrative authorities of the State are also directed to ensure that the coercive measures adopted by the court are promptly executed to ensure the presence of the witnesses on the appointed date before the trial court.

¶24

The trial judge shall submit a report every two months on the progress of trial and the steps taken to comply with this order to the learned District Judge.

¶25

A copy of this order be communicated to the learned trial judge through the learned District Judge, Jalaun by the Registrar (Compliance) by FAX.

¶26

Order Date :- 20.2.2023 Vandit

¶27

Digitally signed by :- VANDIT AGRAWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Aabid Khan @ Munna v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Aabid Khan @ Munna 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

Aryan Bhargav @ Kamlesh Vs State of U.P.

Faiz Vs State of U.P.

Akash Vs State of U.P.

Anil Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Sonu Vs State of U.P.

Aman Sharma Vs State of U.P.