MACT | Fraud Vitiates All Judicial Acts, Even Without Specific Review Powers: Rajasthan High Court    |     Right of Private Defense Cannot Be Weighed in Golden Scales: Madhya Pradesh High Court Acquits Appellant in Culpable Homicide Case    |     Pre-Arrest Bail Not a Right but an Exception: Himachal High Court Denied Bail In Dowry Death Case"    |     Service Law | Similarly Situated Employees Cannot Be Denied Equal Treatment: PH High Court Orders Regularization    |     Presumption of Innocence Remains Supreme Unless Clearly Overturned: PH High Court Affirming Acquittal    |     Any Physical Liaison with A Girl Of Less Than Eighteen Years Is A Strict Offense.: Patna High Court Reiterates Strict Stance On Sexual Offences Against Minors    |     Orissa High Court Rules Res Judicata Inapplicable When Multiple Appeals Arise from Same Judgment    |     Mandatory Section 80 Notice Cannot Be Bypassed Lightly:  Jammu & Kashmir High Court Returns Plaint for Non-Compliance    |     Bombay High Court Denies Permanent Lecturer Appointment for Failing to Meet UGC Eligibility Criteria at Time of Appointment    |     Deferred Cross-Examination Gave Time for Witness Tampering, Undermining Fair Trial: Allahabad High Court    |     Dowry Death | Presumption Under Section 113-B Not Applicable as No Proof of Cruelty Soon Before Death : Supreme Court    |     Land Acquisition | Jaiprakash Associates Ltd. (JAL) Liable for Compensation under Supplementary Award, Not Ultra-Tech Cement Ltd.: Supreme Court    |     Non-Mentioning of Bail Orders in Detention Reflects Clear Non-Application of Mind: J&K High Court Quashes Preventive Detention Order    |     Conviction Under Arms Act and Criminal Conspiracy Quashed Due to Non-Seizure of Key Evidence and Failure to Prove Ownership of Box: Jharkhand High Court    |    

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

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


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.

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.

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.

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."

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.

Similar News