Allowed

Jabbar v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC29 May 2023BAIL/50708/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C., the Allahabad High Court allowed bail for the applicant, Jabbar, who is mentally ill and claims false implication in an IPC 302 case. The court held the applicant made out a case for bail after hearing counsel and perusing the record.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail subject to personal bond, two sureties, and conditions against tampering, influencing witnesses, and absence from trial court.

Jabbar Vs State of U.P. — Service and Employment | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:120247

¶2

Court No. - 79

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 50708 of 2017

¶4

Applicant :- Jabbar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Dileep Kumar,Muktesh Singh,Rajrshi Gupta

¶5

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Jitendra Kumar Singh,Rajesh Kumar Yadav,Ruchita Jain

¶6

Hon'ble Mayank Kumar Jain,J.

¶7

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

¶8

The present bail application has been filed on behalf of applicant in Case Crime No. 209 of 2014, under Sections 147, 148, 149 and 302/34 of IPC, Police Station Nawabbad, District Jhansi, with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail.

¶9

It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that file of the applicant was separated with the other co-accused vide order dated 11.08.2017 passed in S.T. No.- 13 of 2015 (State Vs. Anees @ Bholu) on the ground that applicant was admitted in mental asylum at Varanasi on the basis of medical report filed before the trial court and the proceedings against the applicant for that reason were stayed. The physical and mental condition of the applicant is deteriorating day by day and he is not getting proper treatment. The applicant is wholly innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that in the main trial, accused persons were convicted vide order dated 25.02.2020 and they have filed criminal appeal before this Court numbered as 1578 of 2020 in which wife of the applicant, Zameela has been granted bail vide order dated 30.04.2020 passed in the aforesaid appeal. It is further submitted that status of trial is brought on record to demonstrate the progress in the trial. The applicant has been diagnosed as mentally ill for a considerable period of time for that reason the applicant is unable to participate in the trial, however, the learned trial court has fixed the date for recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. while the applicant has moved an application stating that since the

¶10

evidence was earlier recorded against the applicant in the absence of the applicant, therefore, it cannot be read as evidence against the applicant. It is further submitted that applicant is languishing in jail since 08.04.2014 having no criminal history and that in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.

¶11

Per contra, the learned Additional Government Advocate and learned counsel for the informant have opposed the prayer for grant of bail but they could not dispute the aforesaid aspect of the matter.

¶12

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, 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.

¶13

Let the applicant Jabbar in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned subject to the following conditions:

¶14

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

¶15

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

¶16

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

¶17

(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.

¶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 :- 29.5.2023 Virendra

¶20

Digitally signed by :- VIRENDRA KUMAR BHARTEEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Jabbar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jabbar 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

Mujiburrehaman Vs State of U.P.

Ramveer Singh Vs State of U.P.

Haider Raini Vs State of U.P.

Arun Vs State of U.P.

Pradeep Chauhan Vs State of U.P.

Pawan Vs State of U.P.