Shakir vs State of U.P.

This is the second bail application on behalf of the applicant Shakir seeking enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 115 of 2024 under Sections 302, 34 I.P.C, P.S. Phalawada, District Meerut during the pendency of the trial. The first bail application was rejected by this Court vide order dated 10.07.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 846 of 2025 observing that the applicant was involved in the heinous offence resulting in the death of the son of the informant and no reason was found to falsely implicate the applicant and, as such, release him on bail.

¶10

Sri Vivek Singh, learned counsel for the applicant while pressing the 2nd Bail Application of the applicant has vehemently argued that the role of the applicant is only to bring the deceased from his house to the bus stand where the incident is stated to have taken place. The applicant has not been assigned the role of firing which role has been assigned to co-accused Gilman @ Monu. The recovery of the weapon used in the commission of the crime has been recovered from the possession and pointing out of the co-accused Gilman @ Monu. It was Gilman @ Monu who had threatened the deceased just prior to the incident. It is further

¶11

BAIL No. 42908 of 2025

¶12

2

¶13

submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 18.06.2024 having no criminal antecedents. It is also argued that chargesheet against the applicant has already been submitted on 10.09.2024. The charges against the applicant has already been framed and the trial is proceeding. There are 4 fact witnesses and total 19 witnesses. Statements of PW1 and PW2 have been recorded and they have been examined. PW1 Faizan who is the first informant and father of the deceased in his chief has stated that Gilman @ Monu had shot his son Anas. He also stated that Gilman @ Monu had motive to kill Anas. He also stated that the applicant Sakir had taken his son Anas (deceased) from the house though he had not seen anybody shooting at his son. It is also argued that PW2 in his statement has also nominated Gilman @ Monu to have fired upon Anas (deceased) on the instigation of the applicant. It is argued that the trial shall take a long time to conclude and considering the role of the applicant, he is entitled to be released on bail. Hence, bail has been prayed for.

¶14

Per contra, learned AGA has opposed the second bail plea by submitting that the applicant may not have a direct role of firing but his involvement in the heinous crime cannot be ruled out. He, however, could not dispute the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant.

¶15

Considering all above facts and circumstances, the nature of accusations, severity of the punishment in the case of conviction and nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tampering with the witness and prima facie case, but without commenting on merit of case, a case for bail is made out.

¶16

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed .

¶17

Let the accused-applicant, Shakir , involved in above mentioned case crime number be released on bail, on his executing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each, in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions:

¶18

The applicant will not tamper with the evidence.

¶19

BAIL No. 42908 of 2025

¶20

3

¶21

The applicant will not indulge in any criminal activity.

¶22

The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and co-operate in the trial.

¶23

The applicant will appear regularly on each and every date fixed by the trial court, unless his personal appearance is exempted through counsel by the court concerned.

¶24

In the event of breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the court below will be at liberty to proceed to cancel his bail.

¶25

December 15, 2025 Anjali

¶26

(Ashutosh Srivastava,J.)

¶27

Digitally signed by :- ANJALI SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Shakir v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shakir v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mohit Chaudhary @ Harsh Aditya vs State of U.P.

Kafeel Ahmad vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Arpit vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Nawab Singh Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Ravi Nagar Alias Ravindra Singh Alias Ravi Kana vs State of U.P.

Veerpal @ Nilu Vs State of U.P.