Allowed

Shahid Jamal v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC9 Oct 2023BAIL/56773/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Released applicant Shahid Jamal on bail in a criminal trial once denied, due to over eight years of incarceration pending trial despite no prior criminal history, without expressing opinion on case merits.

What did the court decide?

Released on personal bond and two sureties in like amount subject to conditions of attendance and no tampering.

What the court decided

Shahid Jamal Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:194191

¶2

Court No. - 70

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 56773 of 2022

¶4

Applicant :- Shahid Jamal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Shipra Kureel Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.

¶6

Counter affidavit filed today on behalf of the State and supplementary affidavit filed today on behalf of the applicant are taken on record.

¶7

Heard Ms. Shipra Kureel, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Suresh Bahadur Singh, learned AGA for the State.

¶8

The instant bail application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 128 of 2015, under Sections 302, 307, 34, 323, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Jaitpura, District Varanasi during pendency of the trial.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that this is second bail application filed on behalf of the applicant. The first bail application of the applicant was dismissed by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 14.03.2018 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 9115 of 2018. She further submits that she is pressing the instant second bail application mainly on the ground that applicant in the present matter is in jail since 11.09.2015 i.e. for more than eight years and till date trial of the case could not be concluded.

¶10

She further submits that in the charge-sheet there are as many as 21 prosecution witnesses and till date only four prosecution witnesses could be examined, therefore, it appears that trial of the case is moving with languid pace and there is no hope of its early disposal. She further submits that applicant is not having any previous criminal history.

¶11

Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submits that applicant and co-accused inflicted knife injuries to the

¶12

deceased and his brother Sarfaraz and Sarfaraz stated in his statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. that applicant is the person, who caused knife injuries to the deceased and his brother and after considering the entire facts of the case, the first bail application of the applicant was dismissed but he could not dispute the fact that applicant is in jail for more than eight years and he is not having any previous criminal history and out of 21 prosecution witnesses only four prosecution could be examined till date.

¶13

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.

¶14

Although, this is second bail application filed on behalf of the applicant. The first bail application of the applicant was dismissed on merit by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 14.03.2018 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 9115 of 2018 but from the record it reflects that applicant is in jail for more than eight years and trial of the case could not be concluded till date and in the charge-sheet there are as many as 21 prosecution witnesses and out of them only four prosecution witnesses could be examined till date, therefore, it appears that trial of the case is moving with snail's speed and there is no hope of its early disposal.

¶15

Therefore, considering the fact that applicant is in jail for more than eight years and there is no hope of early disposal of trial and he is not having any previous criminal history, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶16

Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed .

¶17

Let the applicant - Shahid Jamal be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶18

(i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted.

¶19

(ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make 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 or any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶20

(iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social

¶21

activity.

¶22

In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant.

¶23

It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial.

¶24

Order Date :- 9.10.2023 AK Pandey

¶25

Digitally signed by :- ANUPAM KUMAR PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Shahid Jamal v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Shahid Jamal 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

Mahtab Vs State of U.P.

Avanish Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Firoz Vs State of U.P.

Netra Pal Vs State of U.P.

Dinesh Kori Vs State of U.P.

Ban Mali Vs State of U.P.