Allowed

Raja Alias Shadab Kahn v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC22 Aug 2023BAIL/54537/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment grants bail to an applicant facing charges of assault and attempt to murder. The court allowed the application based on vague FIR role, lack of identification as the principal offender, alleged self-defence, inordinate trial delay, and witness uncooperation.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties in the like amount, subject to conditions against tampering and ensuring appearance.

Raja Alias Shadab Kahn Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:168499

¶2

Court No. - 66

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 54537 of 2022

¶4

Applicant :- Raja Alias Shadab Khan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Jai Prakash Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Raja Ullah Khan

¶5

Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.

¶6

By means of the bail application the applicant has prayed to be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No.349 of 2021 at Police Station-Tilhar, District-Shahjahanpur under Sections 304, 452, 384, 504 IPC. The applicant is in jail since 17.05.2021.

¶7

The bail application of the applicant was rejected by the learned trial court on 13.10.2022.

¶8

The following arguments made by Shri Jai Prakash 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:

¶9

The F.I.R. assigns a vague and general role to the applicant in the assault.

¶10

The applicant has not been identified as the principal offender who inflicted the fatal injury on the deceased.

¶11

In this case the informant's side were in fact the aggressor. The applicant acted in defence of his life and he did not exceed the right of self defence.

¶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 status report sent by the learned trial court records that one of the witness-Rashid Khan has not appeared in response to the summons. The bailable warrants have been issued against him. The trial is being delayed on account of failure to the prosecution witnesses to cooperate with the trial proceedings. In fact the trial is being impeded by the aforesaid prosecution witnesses only to prolonged the incarceration of the applicant.

¶16

The applicant has explained his criminal history. It is contended that the applicant is a convenient scapegoat for the police authorities who have falsely nominated him in another case only to show the proficiency of the police investigators. The said case has no bearing on the instant bail application.

¶17

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

¶18

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-Raja Alias Shadab Khan 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 :- 22.8.2023 Ashish Tripathi

¶24

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

Raja Alias Shadab Kahn v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raja Alias Shadab Kahn 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

Dharm Singh Vs State of U.P and 3 Others

Vinod Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Gulfam Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Pradeep Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Saddam Vs State of U.P.

Smt Sunita Agarwal Vs State of U.P.