Allahabad High Court
Usman @ Chapati vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. on 23 September, 2025
Author: Karunesh Singh Pawar
Bench: Karunesh Singh Pawar
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:59415
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
LUCKNOW
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5353 of 2023
Usman @ Chapati
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.
.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)
:
Mohammad Azam Siddiqui, Brijesh Singh Vishen, Jyotindra Prakash Pathak
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)
:
G.A.
Court No. - 12
HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J.
Heard Sri Jyotindra Prakash Pathak, learned Amicus Curiae for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State-respondent and perused the record.
This is the second bail application of the applicant which has been filed by accused-applicant seeking bail in Case Crime No. 476 of 2019 under Sections 302, 394, 411 IPC, Police Station- Saadatganj, District- Lucknow. The first bail application of the applicant bearing Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.7445 of 2021 was dismissed vide order dated 20.09.2022, the relevant part of the order is extracted below:-
"3. Allegation against the accused-applicant and co-accused is of killing the deceased and his wife on 12.12.2019. Accused-applicant has been identified as one of the two assailants from the CCTV footage of the locality. On his pointing out, weapon of assault, jewellery and the cash looted from the house of the deceased was recovered. The deceased sustained following ante-mortem injuries:-
"1.Incised wound 5 cm x 1 cm x muscle deep present on Lt. side face and chin.
2. Stab wound 2 cm x 1 cm x muscle deep present on Lt. Side face just below Lt. Ear lobule.
3.Stab wound 4 cm x 1 cm x muscle deep present on Lt. side back of Lt. Ear.
4. Stab wound 7 cm x 2 cm x trachea cavity deep present on Lt. side neck 4 cm below lt. Ear lobule.
5. Stab wound 3 cm x 3 cm x trachea cavity deep present on front of neck 3 cm below chin.
6. Incised wound 7 cm x 1.5 cm x trachea cavity deep present on front and Lt. Side of neck, 6 cm below chin.
7. Stab wound 3 cm x 1 cm x muscle deep present on Rt. side neck 7 cm below Rt. Angle of mouth.
8. Stab wound 3 cm x 1 cm x muscle deep present on Rt. Side neck 8 cm below Rt. Angle of mouth.
9. Stab wound 1 cm x 1 cm x muscle deep present on Rt. Side upper chest 4 cm below mid of Rt. Clavicle.
4. Sri Ran Vijay Singh, learned AGA submits that there is an eye witness account to the incident.
5. Considering the heinousness of offence and the manner in which two innocent persons killed allegedly by the accused-applicant and co-accused for robbing them of their valuables as they were staying alone and her daughter was staying abroad, this Court does not find any ground to enlarge the accused-applicant on bail at this stage.
6. Bail application is accordingly rejected.
7. However, the trial court is directed to expedite the trial proceedings and conclude the same at the earliest."
Learned A.G.A. submits that the trial is at the stage of defence evidence.
It appears that the prosecution witnesses have been examined.
Sri Jyotindra Prakash Pathak, learned Amicus Curiae has relied upon the judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Tapas Kumar Palit Vs. State of Chhattisgarh reported in 2025 SCC Online SC 322 and submits that although while rejecting the first bail application of the applicant, the trial court was directed to expedite the trial proceedings and conclude the same at the earliest. However, still the trial is at the stage of defence evidence and has not been concluded and the applicant is languishing in jail since 14.12.2019, the trial is not likely to be concluded in near future and there is no chance of tampering the prosecution evidence in case the applicant is enlarged on bail.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer and submits that it is a double murder case.
Sri Pathak, learned Amicus Curiae has stated that there is no direct evidence against the applicant and he has no previous criminal antecedents.
On due consideration to the submission advanced, perusal of the record as also the fact that the applicant is languishing in jail since 14.12.2019 having no criminal history, trial is at the stage of defence evidence, there appears to be no chance of tampering the prosecution evidence by the applicant as also the judgement of Hon'ble Sureme Court in the case of Tapas Kumar Palit ( supra) so also the judgment passed in Javed Gulam Nabi Shaikh Vs. State of Maharashtra and another : Criminal Appeal No. 2787 of 2024 and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail.
Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.
Let the applicant- Usman @ Chapati be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number subject to his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court concerned with the following conditions:-
(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.
(ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.
(iii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any 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 to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
(iv) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.
(v) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Panel Code (now Section 269 of BNS).
(vi) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. (now Section 84 BNSS) is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Panel Code (now Section 209 BNS).
(Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.)
September 23, 2025
dk/
