Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:91344 Court No. - 66 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 18341 of 2025 Applicant :- Umardeen Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ajay Kumar Pandey,Sheshadri Trivedi,Sr. Advocate Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J. 1. Sri S.I. Jafri, learned Advocate filed his power on behalf of the informant, today in the Court, which is taken on record. 2. Supplementary affidavit filed today on behalf of the applicant is also taken on record. 3. Heard Sri Satish Trivedi, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Sheshadri Trivedi, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri N.I. Jafri, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri S.I. Jafri, learned counsel for the informant and Sri Rajeev Dhar Dwivedi, learned AGA for the State. 4. The instant bail application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 694 of 2022, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 307, 120B IPC, Police Station Khurja Nagar, District Bulandshahr during pendency of the trial. 5. Learned Senior Advocate appearing on behalf of the applicant submits, however, applicant is named in the FIR and as per allegation he along with others committed the murder of the father of the informant but entire allegation leveled against the applicant is totally false. 6. He further submits, along with applicant co-accused Riyasuddin was also made accused with similar allegation and co-accused Riyasuddin has been released on bail by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court after considering his long incarceration and his bail order has been annexed at page-139 of the paper-book and on facts, case of applicant is at par with him. 7. He further submits, however, bail application of co-accused Mustaqeem @ Murari has been dismissed by this Court vide order dated 06.10.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 39952 of 2023 after considering the merit of the case but after bail rejection order passed by this Court in case of co-accused Mustaqeem @ Murari, co-accused Riyasuddin has been released on bail by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court, therefore, it would not be proper to withheld the bail application of the applicant on the ground that bail application of co-accused Mustaqeem @ Murari has been dismissed by this Court. 8. He further submits, however, dates were being fixed for recording the statements of accused persons under Section 313 Cr.P.C. but informant himself is trying to delay the trial and he earlier moved two transfer applications and when his transfer applications were dismissed then he ultimately moved application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. for recording the evidence of two alleged eye witnesses and on 07.04.2025 his application filed under Section 311 Cr.P.C. has been allowed, therefore, there is no hope of early disposal of the trial. He next submits, applicant is in jail since 01.08.2022 i.e for last more than two and half years and considering the totality of facts and circumstances of the case, it cannot be said that applicant is responsible for delay in trial. 9. He further submits, however, apart from the present case applicant is having criminal history of three other cases but his criminal history has been explained in the affidavit and supplementary affidavit filed in support of instant bail application and out of three cases two cases were of minor offences and however third case relates to offence of extortion under Section 386 IPC but in that case applicant is on bail. 10. He further submits, therefore, considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, applicant should be enlarged on bail. 11. Per contra, learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the informant opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that it is a case in which father of the informant has been murdered inside the Mosque by the applicant and others, therefore, allegations leveled against the applicant and others are quite serious. 12. They further submitted that even bail application of co-accused Mustaqeem @ Murari has been dismissed by this Court after considering the merit of the case but they could not dispute the fact that after that bail application of co-accused Riyasuddin has been allowed by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court after considering his long incarceration and applicant is also in jail since 01.08.2022 i.e for last more than two and half years. 13. They further could not dispute the fact that on the application moved by the informant under Section 311 Cr.P.C. now dates are being fixed for recording the evidence of witnesses and there is no evidence that applicant caused any delay in the trial. 14. However, learned Senior Advocate appearing on behalf of the informant further submits, actually applicant is having criminal history of four other cases and he was having previous criminal history of two cases of extortion and he did not explain his one criminal history of extortion but he could not dispute the fact, said case is of the year 2019 and in the present matter applicant is in jail since 01.08.2022 i.e for last more than two and half years. 15. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 16. However, it is a case of in which as per allegation applicant and others by causing firearm injuries committed the murder of the father of the informant inside the Mosque, therefore, prima facie allegation leveled against the applicant and others appears to be quite serious and considering the merit of the case even bail application of co-accused Mustaqueem @ Murari has been dismissed on merit but it reflects, in the present matter applicant is in jail since 01.08.2022 i.e for last more than two and half years and till date trial of the case could not be concluded. 17. 17. Record further suggests that at belated stage of the trial on the application moved by the informant under Section 311 Cr.P.C. now dates are being again fixed for recording the evidence of alleged two eye witnesses, therefore, from the record it could not be reflected that applicant and other accused caused any delay in trial. 18. Further, even after rejection of bail application of co-accused Mustaqeem, the bail application of co-accused Riyasuddin has been allowed by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 12.05.2025 on the ground of his long incarceration and on facts case of applicant is at par with him. 19. Further, however, apart from the present case applicant is having criminal history of four other cases including two cases of extortion and he explained his criminal history of only three cases but considering the fact that unexplained case of extortion is of the year 2019 and applicant is in jail since August, 2022, in view of this Court it is not proper to withheld the bail application of the applicant merely on this ground. 20. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 21. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed. 22. Let the applicant - Umardeen 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. 23. 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. 24. 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. Order Date :- 28.5.2025 AK Pandey Digitally signed by :- ANUPAM KUMAR PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- ANUPAM KUMAR PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad