Ali Jamin Vs State of U.P.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:75263

Court No. - 66

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4649 of 2025

Applicant :- Ali Jamin Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Irshad Ahmad Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.

¶6

Supplementary affidavit filed by the applicant is taken on record.

¶7

Heard Sri Irshad Ahmad, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Pradeep Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State-respondent.

¶8

The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 204 of 2023, Under Section 302 I.P.C, Police Station Hajratnagar Gadi District Sambhal, during pendency of the trial in the court below.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submits, however as per the allegation made in the FIR applicant and three others made assault and due to the assault made by them husband of the informant died but entire allegation levelled against the applicant is totally false.

¶10

He further submits, admittedly informant of the case was not the eye witness.

¶11

He next submits, after 78 days of the incident I.O. recorded the statement of daughter of the informant namely Kashish on 28.11.2023 and she started claiming herself eye witness.

¶12

He next submits however, as per the eye witness Kashish applicant was the person who cut the throat of the deceased but when she was examined by the trial court as P.W.5 then during trial she was declared hostile and her statement recorded by the trial court has been annexed along with the supplementary affidavit dated 27.01.2025 filed in support of the instant bail application.

¶13

He next submits, except the witness Kashish, there is no other eye witness account.

¶14

He further submits, even informant of the case has been declared hostile during trial.

¶15

He further submits, however apart from the present case applicant is having criminal history of one another case but his criminal history has been explained in the instant bail application and in that case he is on bail and in the present matter he is in jail since 15.12.2023 i.e. for last more than a year.

¶16

Per contra, learned AGA however, opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the argument on facts advanced by learned counsel for the applicant.

¶17

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

¶18

However, applicant is named in the FIR along with three others but it reflects informant was not an eye witness and when her statement was recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. then she stated that her daughter Kashish informed her about the incident but surprisingly the statement of the daughter of the informant namely Kashish was recorded by the investigating officer during investigation after 78 days.

¶19

Further, however, witness Kashish in her statement recorded during investigation stated that applicant along with his other associates committed the murder of her father but during trial she did not support the prosecution case and has been declared hostile. It also appears, except the witness Kashish, there is no other eye witness of the incident.

¶20

Record also suggest that during trial even informant of the case has been turned hostile.

¶21

Further, however apart from the present case applicant is having criminal history of one another case but his criminal history has been explained in the instant bail application.

¶22

Further, applicant is in jail in the present matter since 15.12.2023 i.e. for last more than a year.

¶23

Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶24

Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of

¶25

the case, the instant bail application is allowed .

¶26

Let the applicant- Ali Jamin, 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:-

¶27

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

¶28

(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.

¶29

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

¶30

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.

¶31

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.

¶32

Order Date :- 8.5.2025 Ankita

¶33

Digitally signed by :- ANKITA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ali Jamin v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ali Jamin 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

All orders in this case

Similar cases