Absence of Prima Facie Case and Prolonged Custody Key for Bail Grant – Allahabad High Court in UAPA Case

Share:
advocate judicial party RPF Advocates live Mother SARFAESI steel v Departmental properly Evidence Divorce Property Factual Bail FIR 376 Bail bail Child Allahabad High Cour 1989 Appointment Investigation Cheque Fear mother IIIT court Law application Acquittal 29A Marriage Maintenance Dowry Application dowryMarriage bail Land Earning Justice Written Statement Maintenance Summoning Rape Video Death Bail Guilty jurisdiction 138Assault investigation Temple bail Wife velectricity Child Drinking final murder Love Cheque Throwing Brick Husband NDPS Case  allahabad addition preliminary evidence Cheque Bounce murder evidence grievances dowry 210 consideration order corporation advocate certificate marriage application mechanical maintenance financial evidence electricity wife probation bail individual investigation

Lucknow, March  2024: The Allahabad High Court, in a landmark decision, has granted bail to Masood, in the case titled Masood Vs. The State Of U.P., underlining the absence of a prima facie case against the appellant and the significance of prolonged custody. The Bench comprising Hon’ble Attau Rahman Masoodi, J., and Hon’ble Ajai Kumar Srivastava-I, J., delivered the judgment on March 12, 2024, in Criminal Appeal No. – 54 of 2023, reversing the order dated 06.12.2022 that had previously denied bail to Masood.

Legal Point of the Judgment:

The crucial legal aspect of the judgment revolved around the appellant’s entitlement to bail under Section 21(4) of the National Investigation Agency Act, 2008, amidst charges under the IPC, UAPA, and IT Act. The judgment specifically dealt with the absence of a prima facie case against Masood and his right to bail considering his extended period in custody.

Facts and Issues:

The appellant, Masood, faced accusations under various stringent laws, including the IPC, UAPA, and IT Act, leading to his prolonged incarceration since October 5, 2020. The appeal was centered on the ground that there was no substantive evidence linking Masood to the alleged offences, which echoed the circumstances under which co-accused were previously granted bail.

Court’s Detailed Assessment:

The Court scrupulously examined the allegations, observing that Masood was not linked to any terrorist organization nor involved in any activity warranting charges under the stringent sections of the UAPA and IT Act. It was noted, “The allegations made in the F.I.R. and the contents of the case diary…clearly evince that accusation made against the appellant is, prima facie, false.”

Decision:

Granting the appeal, the Court allowed Masood’s bail, emphasizing the parity in treatment with the co-accused who had been granted bail and the undue length of Masood’s custody. The bail was subject to several conditions, including a personal bond, restricted travel, and instructions not to influence witnesses or evidence. The Court clarified that this order should not influence the trial proceedings.

 Date of Decision: 12th March 2024

Masood Vs. The State Of U.P.

Download Judgment

Share: