Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:14580 Court No. - 5 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 50042 of 2023 Applicant :- Shamsuddin @ Chachcha Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Bhupendra Pal,Mohammad Shahrum Khan Counsel for Opposite Party :- Anuj Kumar Mishra,G.A. Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J. By means of the bail application the applicant has prayed to be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No. 127 of 2022 at Police Station- Jajmau, District- Kanpur Nagar under Sections 147, 327, 427, 386, 436, 504, 506, 120B IPC. The applicant is in jail since 18.07.2023. The bail application of the applicant was rejected by the learned trial court on 04.10.2023. The following arguments made by Sri Dileep Singh Yadav, learned counsel on behalf of the applicant, which could not be satisfactorily refuted by Sri Anuj Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the informant and Sri Vikas Sahai, learned AGA from the record, entitle the applicant for grant of bail: 1. The applicant was not named in the FIR. 2. The applicant was subsequently nominated in the statement of the witness who was set up by inimical parties in the area against the applicant. The aforesaid statement is unreliable for various reasons as well. There was no cause for the failure of the witness to promptly inform the police authorities about the complicity of the applicant in the incident. 3. The applicant is a law abiding citizen who cooperated in the investigation and has joined the trial proceedings. The applicant never tampered with the evidence nor influenced any witness. 4. The trial is moving at a snail's pace and and shows no sign of early conclusion. The applicant cannot be faulted for the delay in the trial. 5. Status report sent by the learned trial court records that the prosecution proposes to examine 49 witnesses. However, only one witness has been examined till date. Status report sent by the trial court also records that a number of prosecution witnesses are not cooperating in the trial and coercive process have been taken against the said witnesses. There is no possibility of any witnesses being influenced by the applicant. 6. Prosecution witnesses are deliberately delaying the trial only to prolong the incarceration of the applicant. 7. Inordinate delay in concluding trial has lead to an indefinite detention of the applicant without there being any credible evidence to implicate him in the offence. Right of the applicant to a speedy trial has been violated. 8. The trial is not likely to conclude soon due to heavy docket of the trial court. 9. Learned counsel for the applicant claims congruency in role and seeks parity in relief granted to co-accused Shaukat Ali, Mahboob Alam, Anoop Yadav @ Batau and Ajajuddin @ Sablu who have been granted bail by this Court on 25.04.2023 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 14800 of 2023, order dated 20.07.2023 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 26243 of 2023, order dated 13.07.2023 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 25589 of 2023 and order dated 27.09.2023 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 31945 of 2023 respectively. 10. The applicant has explained his criminal history. It is also contended that the applicant has become a soft target and a convenient scapegoat for the police authorities who nominated him in a number of false cases to burnish their professional credentials. The said cases do not have any bearing on the instant bail application. 11. The applicant is not a flight risk. The applicant being a law abiding citizen has always cooperated with the investigation and undertakes to cooperate with the court proceedings. There is no possibility of his influencing witnesses, tampering with the evidence or reoffending. In the light of the preceding discussion and without making any observations on the merits of the case, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant-Shamsuddin @ Chachcha be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number, on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below. The following conditions be imposed in the interest of justice:- (i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence or influence any witness during the trial. (ii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted (iii) The learned trial court is directed to fix the sureties after due application of mind in light of the judgement passed by this Court in Arvind Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. (Application U/S 482 No.2613 of 2023). The learned trial court shall ensure that the right of bail of the applicant granted by this Court is not frustrated by arbitrary demands of sureties, or onerous conditions which are unrelated to the socioeconomic status of the applicant. Order Date :- 31.1.2025 Pravin Digitally signed by :- PRAVIN VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad