Ansar Ahmad vs State of Uttar Pradesh and Anr.

Court

Supreme Court of India

Date

18 April 2023

Case No.

Criminal Appeal No. 1168 of 2023

Result

Allowed

Bench

Surya Kant, J.B. Pardiwala

Citation

[2023] 4 S.C.R. 577 : 2023 INSC 725

Headnote

Bail – Bail applications filed by two respondents herein in a case crime u/ss.147, 148, 149, 307, 302, 120-B and 34 IPC and ss.

3 & 4 of Explosive Substances Act before the High Court was granted – It was alleged that appellant’s son was killed in a contract killing – During the course of investigation, it was found that while one of the respondents was allegedly present at the spot at the time of occurrence, the other respondent was a part of the conspiracy hatched to eliminate victim-deceased – On appeal, held: The offences were serious in nature and the respondents were allegedly involved in a contract killing – Both respondents had a criminal record – There was a material to indicate the motive behind the murder – Earlier, both respondents were found guilty in a case u/s. 302 IPC – In the instant case, one of the eyewitness is yet to depose as a prosecution witness and it is expedient and is always in the interest of criminal justice system that the prayer for bail is considered after ensuring that the statements of the vital witnesses stand recorded and there is no likelihood of influencing or tampering their evidence – Series of orders passed by the trial Court also indicate that respondents were seeking exemption from personal appearance and trial was completely stalled – Taking into consideration all the relevant facts and circumstances, the High Court did not take into consideration the relevant material while granting bail to the private respondents – Appeals allowed – Orders of the High Court granting bail set aside.

Ash Mohammad v. Shivraj Singh @ Lalla Babu and

Another (2012) 9 SCC 446 : [2012] 7 SCR 584; Puran v. Rambilas and Another (2001) 6 SCC 338 : [2001] 3 SCR 432; Venkatesan Balsubramaniyan v. The

Intelligence Officer, DRI Bangalore (2020) 13 SCALE

191 : [2020] SCR 942 – referred to.

The following Order of the Court was passed: ORDER 1. Leave granted. 2. The appellant seeks to assail two orders of even date i.e., 23.09.2021, passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench, Lucknow whereby the Bail Application No. 624 of 2019, filed by the respondent – Subhash Yadav, and Bail Application No. 4309 of 2019, filed by the respondent – Rajesh Vikram Singh, in Case Crime No. 17 of 2018 under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 302, 120-B/34 IPC and Sections 3/4 of the Explosive Substances Act, Police Station Jagdishpur, District Amethi were allowed and both the abo

View Subscription Plans →