The Allahabad High Court rejected a repeat bail application filed by Azad Khan in a murder case. The court held that no new or good ground existed for bail despite the trial court's directive for expeditious trial and the applicant's prolonged incarceration.
Bail application rejected; applicant liable to remain in custody.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:165614
Court No. - 65
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 562 of 2023
Applicant :- Azad Khan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Syed Faiz Hasnain,Mohd. Hasham,Syed Riyaz Askari
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Nasira Adil,Sadrul Islam Jafri
Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.
3.This repeat application for bail has been filed by applicant- Azad Khan seeking his enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 0183 of 2020 under Sections 302 I.P.C., Police Station-Ganj, DistrictRampurto during the pendency of trial i.e. Sessions Trial No. 77 of 2020 (State Vs. Azad Khan) Under Section 302 I.P.C.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. and perused the record.
This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 0183 of 2020, under Section 302 I.P.C., Police Station- Ganj, District- Rampur.
As per F.I.R., on 26.05.2020 at 8:30 p.m. Tabish Khan (brother of informant) went out on motorcycle along with two person namely Anwar Ali & Danish Khan. Tabish Khan used to frequently visit the house of accused-appellant Azad Khan, as a result whereof Azad Khan used to suspect in regard to extra marital affairs of his wife with Tabish Khan and had enmical terms with him. Anwar Ali informed to complainant at 9:30 p.m. on phone that Azad Khan along with two unknown person stopped Tabish Khan and Azad Khan shot on his head. They identified Azad Khan in the light of motorcycle.
Learned counsel for the applicant contended that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. Applicant is not at all involved in any manner whatsoever in commission of the offence yet he has been arrested by police. Present case has been lodged only for the harassment of the applicant. There is no criminal antecedent of applicant. The applicant undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty of bail. The applicant is in custody since 01.06.2020. It is further submitted that F.I.R. is delayed and prior to F.I.R. inquest report was prepared. There was no source of light. Some digested food was present in the body of the deceased. Statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. has been recorded delay.
Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer of bail and contended that applicant is main facilitator of gruesome crime. The incident was witnessed by the witnesses. Deceased was aged about 35 years and there was entry wound of bullet of size 4cm x 3cm x brain deep over right side of forehead, margins are irregular and inverted, blackening around the wound. Bullet is recovered. The gun shot injury is the case of prosecution caused by the applicant.
Upon hearing learned counsel and perusal of record and considering the complicity of accused, severity of punishment as well as totality of facts and circumstances, at this stage without expressing any view on the
merits of the case, this Court is of the opinion that it is not a fit case for bail. Hence, the bail application is hereby rejected.
However, trial court is directed to conclude the trial of the case expeditiously and preferably within a period of one year from the date of production of certified/computerized copy of the this order.
Order Date :- 6.1.2022 "
the prosecution witnesses of fact, the complicity alleged to have ben committed by applicant is fully established. Only formal witnesses remained to be examined. They therefore contendes that no new or good ground is made out to enlarge the applicant on bail.
Order Date :- 17.8.2023 YK
Digitally signed by :- YASHWANT KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to bail in a repeat application given the delay in trial and lack of new grounds.
Whether the failure of the trial court to conclude the trial within one year constitutes new ground for bail.
If the applicant complicity and gravity of offence preclude bail despite prolonged incarceration.
Azad Khan
State of U.P.
Rajeev Misra
Yashwant Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
