HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2900 of 2025 Court No. - 5 HON'BLE ALOK MATHUR, J. 1. Heard Sri Gaurav Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned Additional Government Advocate for the State. 2. The present bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant seeking bail in pursuance to the First Information Report registered as Case Crime No. 95 of 2020, under Sections 302, 201, 394, 411, 120-B IPC, Police Station - Malihabad, District - Lucknow. 3. Submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that this is second bail application of the applicant, the first bail application was rejected by this Court by means of order dated 12.08.2024. 4. It is next submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that there are 31 prosecution witnesses and till Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Gaurav Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Shabbu @ Shabab Ahmad .....Applicant(s) The State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy, Home Lko. .....Opposite Party(s) date only 10 witnesses have been examined and there is no likelihood of the trial getting concluded any time soon. It is further submitted that in the trial parents of the deceased, in whose presence in the statement of mother of the deceased, has denied that recovery was made in her presence and similarly father of deceased has also rescinded from his statement recorded during investigation in this regard. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that applicant has criminal history of 12 cases, which has been explained in para 48 of the affidavit filed in support of bail application. It is submitted that in four cases registered against the applicant he is on bail, while in four other cases registered against the applicant he has been acquitted. In two cases registered against the applicant being Case Crime No. 26 of 2010 and Case Crime No. 84 of 2010, the applicant has served the sentence as awarded to him by the trial Court. Further it has been submitted that in Case Crime No. 100 and Case Crime No. 95 of 2020 (present bail application), the applicant is seeking bail. 6. It is next submitted that applicant is in jail for last five and half years and in this regard has placed reliance on the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court rendered in the case of Javed Gulam Nabi Shaikh Vs. State of Maharashtra and Another, Criminal Appeal No. 2787 of 2024 (Arising out of SLP (Crl.) No. 3809 of 2024), BAIL No. 2900 of 2025 2 decided on 03.07.2024, wherein the Apex Court has held as under :- "18. Criminals are not born out but made. The human potential in everyone is good and so, never write off any criminal as beyond redemption. this humanist fundamental is often missed when dealing with delinquents, juvenile and adult. Indeed, every saint has a past and every sinner a future. When a crime is committed, a variety of factors is responsible for making the offender commit the crime. those factor may be social and economic, amy be, the result of value erosion or parental neglect; may be, because of the stress of circumstances, or the manifestation of temptations in a milieu of affluence contrasted with negligence or other privations. 19. If the State or any prosecution agency including the court concerned has no wherewithal to provide or protect the fundamental right of an accused to have a speedy trial as enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution then the State or any other prosecuting agency should not oppose the plea for bail on the ground that the crime committed is serious. Article 21 of the Constitution applied irrespective of the nature of crime. 20. We may hasten to add that the petitioner is still an accused; nor a convict. the over-arching postulate of criminal jurisprudence that an accused is presumed to be innocent until proven guilty cannot be brushed aside BAIL No. 2900 of 2025 3 lightly, howsoever stringent the penal law may be. 21. We are convinced that the manner in which the prosecution agency as well as the Court have proceeded, the right of the accused to have a speedy trial could be said to have been infringed thereby violating Article 21 of the Constitution." 7. Learned A.G.A. has, however, opposed the prayer for grant of bail by submitting that considering the gravity of offence and material which has come up during investigation, the bail application deserves to be rejected. 8. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, perusing the record and also considering the nature of allegations, arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and the fact that the applicant is in jail for about five and half years and out of 31 prosecution witnesses, till date only ten prosecution witnesses have been examined before the trial Court hence there seems no likelihood of trial concluding in near future coupled with the fact that mother and father of the deceased have also rescinded from their statements which were recorded during investigation and the criminal history of the applicant has also been explained in the affidavit filed in support of the bail application and also in the light of Apex Court's judgment in the case of Javed Gulam Nabi Shaikh Vs. State of Maharashtra and Another (supra) , without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a fit case for granting bail. BAIL No. 2900 of 2025 4 9. Let applicant Shabbu @ Shabad Ahmad be released on bail in Case Crime No. 95 of 2020, under Sections 302, 201, 394, 411, 120-B IPC, Police Station - Malihabad, District - Lucknow on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Magistrate/Court concerned, subject to following conditions :- (i) 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. (ii) 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 Penal Code. (iii) 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. 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 Penal Code. (iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before BAIL No. 2900 of 2025 5 the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. 10. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the Court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail and proceed against the applicant in accordance with law. 11. The application stands disposed of. September 25, 2025 A. Verma BAIL No. 2900 of 2025 6 (Alok Mathur,J.) Digitally signed by :- ANURAG VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench