Allowed

Mohammad Ali v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC22 Sept 2023BAIL/58095/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single-judge Full Bench granted bail to Mohammad Ali in a murder attempt case, noting vague role assignment, parity with a co-accused already released on bail, and prolonged confinement exceeding eleven months post-charge-sheet.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail by furnishing personal bond and two sureties of like amount on conditions not to tamper with evidence, pressurize witnesses, and to appear on all fixed dates.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:184165

¶2

Court No. - 74

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 58095 of 2022

¶4

Applicant :- Mohammad Ali Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Maohammd Nadeem,Mohammad Sabauddin Ansari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Dhirendra Kumar Verma,Prakash Chandra Srivastava,Shyam Shanker Pandey

¶5

Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

¶6

Case called out. Counsel for the informant is not present.

¶7

Heard counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State.

¶8

The instant bail application, under Section 439 Cr.P.C., has been filed with a prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 585 of 2022, under Section 147, 148, 149, 307, 506 I.P.C., Police Station- Nai Mandi, District- Muzaffarnagar during the pendency of trial.

¶9

It is submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. In the first information report fourteen persons including the applicant are alleged to have caused firearm injuries to three persons. General and vague rule has been assigned to the applicant. The applicant has not been nominated as the principal offender who caused the injury to the three injured persons. It is next contended that it is a cross case. Both sides have received injuries. The aggressor is still to be ascertained It is next contended that co-accused Naved, having identical role, has been granted bail by this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 59753 of 2022 vide order dated 25.1.2023. The applicant claims parity. The criminal history of the applicant has been explained in para 2 of the supplementary affidavit. The applicant is in jail since 18.10.2022. In case he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid facts from the record.

¶11

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record this Court prima facie finds that a vague and general role has been assigned to the applicant. The applicant has not been nominated as the principal offender who caused injuries to the three injured persons. Further, the identically placed co-accused

¶12

Naved, having identical role, has been granted bail by this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 59753 of 2022 vide order dated 25.1.2023 and the fact that the applicant has remained confined for more than eleven months and after submission of the charge-sheet there is no hope of early conclusion of trial, more so when no reasonable apprehension has been brought to the fore by the State that the applicant, if enlarged on bail, would either tamper with the evidence or delay the trial or intimidate the witness, without commenting on merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶13

Let the applicant- Mohammad Ali, involved in the aforesaid case be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned on the following conditions that:

¶14

i. the applicant shall not temper with the prosecution evidence;

¶15

ii. the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witness; and,

¶16

iii. the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court.

¶17

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.

¶18

Order Date :- 22.9.2023 Sachin Mishra

¶19

Digitally signed by :- SACHIN MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Mohammad Ali v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohammad Ali 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sanjeev Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Vishnu Vs State of U.P.

Amandeep Singh Vs State of U.P.

Kamal @ Kalam Vs State of U.P.

Jaypal @ Jagpal Singh Vs State of U.P.

Sanfaraj Vs State of U.P.