High Court · 2025

1. Heard Sri Kamal Krishna, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Ghan Shyam Das, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Pradeep Kumar, learned AGA for the State-respondent.

2. The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 677 of 2017, under Sections 302, 120B IPC, Police Station Sigra, District Varanasi, during pendency of the trial in the court below.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that FIR of the present case was lodged against unknown person but during investigation applicant has been made accused on the basis of information furnished by the police informer alongwith co-accused Rajkumar.

4. He further submitted that except confessional statement of applicant and statement of co-accused before police there is no other evidence against the applicant on record.

5. He further submitted that actually applicant is having criminal history of as many as 17 cases and therefore, only due to previous criminal history, he has been made accused in the present matter by police during investigation of the case. He further submitted that entire criminal antecedents of the applicant have been explained in the supplementary affidavit filed in support to the instant bail application. He further submitted that however, number of cases were the cases of murder but in majority of the cases, police falsely implicated him and in all the cases applicant is on bail.

6. He further submitted that law is settled that if otherwise case of bail is made out then merely on the basis of criminal antecedents, ordinarily bail application of an accused should not be dismissed.

7. He further submitted that applicant is in jail in the present matter since 18.10.2017 i.e. for last more than seven and half years and till date only two prosecution witnesses could be examined, therefore, there is no chance of earlier disposal of the trial.

8. He further submitted that law is also settled that on the ground of long incarceration, an accused can be released on bail even in serious matters.

9. He further submitted that considering the fact that applicant is in jail for seven years, it cannot be said his fundamental right of speedy trial has not been infringed.

10. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that applicant appears to be hardened criminal and apart from the present case, he is having criminal history of 17 other cases including several cases of section 302 IPC but he could not dispute the fact that as far as merit of the present case is concerned only evidence against the applicant is his confessional statement and statement of the co-accused.

11. Learned AGA further could not dispute the fact that in the present matter, applicant is in jail for last more than seven and half years and till date only two prosecution witnesses could be examined.

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

13. However, as per allegation, applicant alongwith co-accused Rajkumar committed the murder of the deceased but he was not named in the FIR and it appears during investigation, he has been made accused in the present matter through the information furnished by police informer and except his confessional statement and statement of the co-accused before the police, there is no other evidence against the applicant on record.

14. Further, however, it reflects that applicant is having criminal history of 17 other cases and out of 17 cases, number of cases were of section 302 IPC but it reflects in the present matter, he is in jail for last more than seven and half years and criminal history of the applicant has been explained in the instant bail application and in all the cases, he is on bail.

15. Further, this Court finds merit in the argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant that if otherwise case of bail is made out then ordinarily merely on the basis of criminal history bail application of an accused should not be withheld.

16. This Court also finds merit in the argument advanced by learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant that even in serious cases on the ground of long incarceration, an accused can be released on bail.

17. Further, as applicant is in jail in the present matter for last more than seven years, therefore, it cannot be said that his fundamental right of speedy trial has not be infringed.

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

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

20. Let the applicant-Abid Siddiqui Alias Prince Alias Pahalwan, 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:- (i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted. (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. (iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity.

21. 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.

22. 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. ANKITA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Order Date :- 14.5.2025/Ankita

1. Heard Sri Kamal Krishna, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Ghan Shyam Das, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Pradeep Kumar, learned AGA for the State-respondent.

2. The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 677 of 2017, under Sections 302, 120B IPC, Police Station Sigra, District Varanasi, during pendency of the trial in the court below.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that FIR of the present case was lodged against unknown person but during investigation applicant has been made accused on the basis of information furnished by the police informer alongwith co-accused Rajkumar.

4. He further submitted that except confessional statement of applicant and statement of co-accused before police there is no other evidence against the applicant on record.

5. He further submitted that actually applicant is having criminal history of as many as 17 cases and therefore, only due to previous criminal history, he has been made accused in the present matter by police during investigation of the case. He further submitted that entire criminal antecedents of the applicant have been explained in the supplementary affidavit filed in support to the instant bail application. He further submitted that however, number of cases were the cases of murder but in majority of the cases, police falsely implicated him and in all the cases applicant is on bail.

6. He further submitted that law is settled that if otherwise case of bail is made out then merely on the basis of criminal antecedents, ordinarily bail application of an accused should not be dismissed.

7. He further submitted that applicant is in jail in the present matter since 18.10.2017 i.e. for last more than seven and half years and till date only two prosecution witnesses could be examined, therefore, there is no chance of earlier disposal of the trial.

8. He further submitted that law is also settled that on the ground of long incarceration, an accused can be released on bail even in serious matters.

9. He further submitted that considering the fact that applicant is in jail for seven years, it cannot be said his fundamental right of speedy trial has not been infringed.

10. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that applicant appears to be hardened criminal and apart from the present case, he is having criminal history of 17 other cases including several cases of section 302 IPC but he could not dispute the fact that as far as merit of the present case is concerned only evidence against the applicant is his confessional statement and statement of the co-accused.

11. Learned AGA further could not dispute the fact that in the present matter, applicant is in jail for last more than seven and half years and till date only two prosecution witnesses could be examined.

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

13. However, as per allegation, applicant alongwith co-accused Rajkumar committed the murder of the deceased but he was not named in the FIR and it appears during investigation, he has been made accused in the present matter through the information furnished by police informer and except his confessional statement and statement of the co-accused before the police, there is no other evidence against the applicant on record.

14. Further, however, it reflects that applicant is having criminal history of 17 other cases and out of 17 cases, number of cases were of section 302 IPC but it reflects in the present matter, he is in jail for last more than seven and half years and criminal history of the applicant has been explained in the instant bail application and in all the cases, he is on bail.

15. Further, this Court finds merit in the argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant that if otherwise case of bail is made out then ordinarily merely on the basis of criminal history bail application of an accused should not be withheld.

16. This Court also finds merit in the argument advanced by learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant that even in serious cases on the ground of long incarceration, an accused can be released on bail.

17. Further, as applicant is in jail in the present matter for last more than seven years, therefore, it cannot be said that his fundamental right of speedy trial has not be infringed.

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

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

20. Let the applicant-Abid Siddiqui Alias Prince Alias Pahalwan, 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:- (i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted. (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. (iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity.

21. 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.

22. 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. ANKITA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Order Date :- 14.5.2025/Ankita