Razi @ Shanu (Second Bail) vs State Of U.P.
2015 Latest Caselaw 528 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 

?Court No. - 17
 

 
Case :- BAIL No. - 4291 of 2013
 

 
Applicant :- Razi @ Shanu (Second Bail)
 
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Krishna Kumar Singh,Nisar Ahmad
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt.Advocate,Avinash Kumar
 

 
Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J.

Heard Sri I.B. Singh, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Nisar Ahmad, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Avinash Singh, learned counsel for the complainant and Sri Alok Mohan Upadhyay, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State and perused the record.

This is the second bail application on behalf of the applicant. First bail application of the applicant was rejected by Hon'ble V.C. Gupta, J. vide order dated 20.5.2013 for want of prosecution.

It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the son of the informant went missing on 5.8.2011 for which a missing report was lodged and F.I.R. was registered on 3.9.2011 in which no one was named. Thereafter an application was moved on 15.12.2014 before the concerned police station by the informant stating that two co-accused Abhay  Joshi and Shabbir have made an extra judicial confession that they along with the applicant and co-accused Razi had committed the abduction of the victim and he was done to death by the applicant along with co-accused Razi and there is no legal evidence to connect him with the present crime only on the basis of extra judicial confession of the said co-accused persons. The applicant has no other reported criminal antecedent. The applicant is in jail since 26.9.2011.

Learned counsel for the complainant and learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail and opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that Sim card which was said to be used in the crime by the applicant for asking ransom by the grand father of the victim has been recovered from the possession of the applicant and his voice was also identified by the witness.

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the submission advanced, I find no good ground for grant of bail to the applicant Razi @ Shanu involved in Case Crime No. 556 of 2011 under Sections 364A/34, 302/34, 201/34 I.P.C., police station Motipur, District Bahraich

Accordingly, the bail application is rejected.

However, the trial court is directed to expedite the trial of the aforesaid case and conclude the same within preferably a period of six months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order, if, there is no legal impediment.

Order Date :- 15.5.2015

shiraz