(N.V. Ramana and Mohan M. Shantanagoudar, JJ.)
Shakil Ahmad _____________________________________ Appellant;
v.
State of Uttar Pradesh and Another ________________ Respondent(s).
Criminal Appeal No. 8/2019 [Arising out of SLP (Crl.) No. 4135 of 2018], decided on January 3, 2019
The Order of the court was delivered by
Order
1. Leave granted.
2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant – complainant and the learned counsel appearing for respondent no. 2 – accused at length.
3. Learned counsel appearing for respondent no. 2 – accused vehemently opposed to interfere with the impugned order passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 113083 of 2016 in Criminal Appeal No. 789 of 2016 granting bail to respondent no. 2 – accused, on the ground that the accused has not misused the bail conditions granted by the High Court. Apart from that, the accused has married after the bail was granted to him by the High Court.
4. We have considered the said contentions made by the learned counsel for accused as well as the contentions made by the learned counsel for complainant.
5. In this case the accused was involved in offences under Sections 452/34 and 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and also under Sections 3/25 of the Arms Act.
6. The Trial Court after elaborate consideration of the material on record convicted all the accused persons and awarded sentence of imprisonment for life under Section 302 of the IPC, four years rigorous imprisonment under Section 452 of the IPC and three years rigorous imprisonment under the Arms Act to respondent no. 2 herein – accused. The High Court has admitted the appeal made by the respondent no. 2 – accused and the same is pending for consideration.
7. The High Court has passed the following impugned order which is reproduced below for perusal:—
“Considering the aforesaid facts, let appellant-Rafat Khan convict of the aforesaid sessions trials be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.”
8. We have perused the said order and find that there is no reason mentioned whether the Court satisfies itself before granting bail to the respondent no. 2 – accused in this case.
9. Apart from that, we have been informed that the accused is involved in (i) Case Crime No. 19/07 under Section 302 IPC, (ii) Case Crime No. 503/2010 under Sections 302, 452 read with Section 34 IPC, (iii) Case Crime No. 508/2010 under Section 3/25 Arms Act, (iv) Case Crime No. 22/16 under Section 307 IPC and 120B IPC and (v) Case Crime No. 207/2016 under Section 2/3 of the U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 and the trial is stated to be pending.
10. In view of the above, we feel that it is not appropriate to allow the respondent no. 2 – accused on bail. Accordingly, we allow the appeal and set aside the impugned order passed by the High Court granting bail to respondent no. 2 herein-accused.
11. As a consequence thereof, respondent no. 2 – accused is directed to surrender before the appropriate Court within a period of four weeks from today, failing which the concerned police authorities shall take him into custody.
12. It is open for respondent no. 2 – accused to make a request to the High Court for early disposal of the appeal pending before it.
13. Before parting, we make it clear that we have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case.
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 4135/2018
Shakil Ahmad _______________________________________ Petitioner
v.
The State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr ___________________ Respondent(s)
Date : 03-01-2019 This petition was called on for hearing today.
(Before N.V. Ramana and Mohan M. Shantanagoudar, JJ.)
For Petitioner(s) Mr. Shakil Ahmed Syed, AOR
Mr. Daanish Ahmad Syed, Adv.
Mr. Mohd. Parvez Dabas, Adv.
Mr. Uzmi Jameel Husain, Adv.
Mr. Mirza Nisar Ahmad Baig, Adv.
For Respondent(s) Ms. Vanshaja Shukla, AOR
Mr. Rishad Murtaza, Adv.
Anuja Pethia, Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
ORDER
14. Leave granted.
15. The appeal is allowed in terms of the signed order.
———
