Allahabad High Court
State Of U.P. vs Mohd. Azam Khan on 3 March, 2023
Author: Dinesh Kumar Singh
Bench: Dinesh Kumar Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD Court No. - 87 1. Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL CANCELLATION APPLICATION No. - 304 of 2020 Applicant :- State of U.P. Opposite Party :- Mohd. Azam Khan Counsel for Applicant :- G.A. Counsel for Opposite Party :- Nasira Adil,Nasira Adil,Nazrul Islam Jafri(Senior Adv.) 2. Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL CANCELLATION APPLICATION No. - 305 of 2020 Applicant :- State of U.P. Opposite Party :- Mohd Azam Khan Counsel for Applicant :- G.A. Counsel for Opposite Party :- Nazrul Islam Jafri(Senior Adv.),Nasira Adil 3. Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL CANCELLATION APPLICATION No. - 306 of 2020 Applicant :- State of U.P. Opposite Party :- Mohd. Azam Khan Counsel for Applicant :- G.A. Counsel for Opposite Party :- Nazrul Islam Jafri(Senior Adv.),Nasira Adil 4. Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL CANCELLATION APPLICATION No. - 307 of 2020 Applicant :- State of U.P. Opposite Party :- Mohd. Azam Khan Counsel for Applicant :- G.A. Counsel for Opposite Party :- Nazrul Islam Jafri(Senior Adv.),Nasira Adil 5. Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL CANCELLATION APPLICATION No. - 317 of 2020 Applicant :- State of U.P. Opposite Party :- Mohd Azam Khan Counsel for Applicant :- A.G.A. Counsel for Opposite Party :- Nazrul Islam Jafri(Senior Adv.),Nasira Adil 6. Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL CANCELLATION APPLICATION No. - 324 of 2020 Applicant :- State of U.P. Opposite Party :- Mohd. Azam Khan Counsel for Applicant :- A.G. Counsel for Opposite Party :- Nazrul Islam Jafri(Senior Adv.),Nasira Adil 7. Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL CANCELLATION APPLICATION No. - 325 of 2020 Applicant :- State of U.P. Opposite Party :- Mohd. Azam Khan Counsel for Applicant :- G.A. Counsel for Opposite Party :- Nazrul Islam Jafri(Senior Adv.),Nasira Adil 8. Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL CANCELLATION APPLICATION No. - 326 of 2020 Applicant :- State of U.P. Opposite Party :- Mohd. Azam Khan Counsel for Applicant :- G.A. Counsel for Opposite Party :- Nazrul Islam Jafri(Senior Adv.),Nasira Adil 9. Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL CANCELLATION APPLICATION No. - 327 of 2020 Applicant :- State of U.P. Opposite Party :- Mohd Azam Khan Counsel for Applicant :- G.A. Counsel for Opposite Party :- Nazrul Islam Jafri(Senior Adv.),Nasira Adil 10. Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL CANCELLATION APPLICATION No. - 328 of 2020 Applicant :- State of U.P. Opposite Party :- Mohd. Azam Khan Counsel for Applicant :- G.A. Counsel for Opposite Party :- Nazrul Islam Jafri(Senior Adv.),Nasira Adil 11. Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL CANCELLATION APPLICATION No. - 329 of 2020 Applicant :- State of U.P. Opposite Party :- Mohd. Azam Khan Counsel for Applicant :- G.A. Counsel for Opposite Party :- Nasira Adil Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh,J.
1. Heard Mr. M.C. Chaturvedi, learned Senior Advocate/Additional Advocate General, assisted by Mr. Jai Narayan and Mr. Ratnendu Kumar Singh, learned Additional Government Advocates, and Mr. Abhijeet Mukherjee, learned State Law Officer, for the applicant - State and Mr. Vivek Tankha, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Mr. Varun Tankha, Mr. Inder Dev Singh and Mohd. Khalid Advocates, for the respondent-accused, and gone through the record.
2. This bunch of applications under Section 439(2) CrPC has been moved on behalf of the State for cancellation of bail granted to the accused-respondent by the learned trial Court in the following crimes:-
"1. Crime/FIR No.0256 of 2019 lodged at Police Station Azeemnagar, District Rampur;
2. Crime/FIR No.237 of 2019 lodged at Police Station Azeemnagar, District Rampur;
3. Crime/FIR No.238 of 2019 lodged at Police Station Azeemnagar, District Rampur;
4. Crime/FIR No.248 of 2019 lodged at Police Station Azeemnagar, District Rampur;
5. Crime/FIR No.250 of 2019 lodged at Police Station Azeemnagar, District Rampur;
6. Crime/FIR No.241 of 2019 lodged at Police Station Azeemnagar, District Rampur;
7. Crime/FIR No.240 of 2019 lodged at Police Station Azeemnagar, District Rampur;
8. Crime/FIR No.249 of 2019 lodged at Police Station Azeemnagar, District Rampur;
9. Crime/FIR No.262 of 2019 lodged at Police Station Azeemnagar, District Rampur;
10. Crime/FIR No.252 of 2019 lodged at Police Station Azeemnagar, District Rampur;
11. Crime/FIR No.251 of 2019 lodged at Police Station Azeemnagar, District Rampur."
3. Allegations in the FIRs, subject matter of the present applications, are almost identical.
4. The accused-respondent was granted bail by the learned trial Court, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of accusations, gravity of offence and its societal impact.
5. The only ground, which has been urged in this bunch of applications, which has been filed for cancellation of bails granted by the learned trial Court to the accused-respondent, is that the learned trial Court did not consider the long criminal history of the accused-respondent, while enlarging him on bail.
6. Mr. Vivek Tankha, learned Senior Advocate, appearing for the accused-respondent, submits that the trial Court has taken note of the criminal history registered against the accused-respondent in the orders impugned herein. Parameters for grant of bail and parameters for cancellation of bail are different. If the relevant parameters have been considered by the trial Court while granting the bail, the High Court should not cancel the bail unless the liberty granted to the accused is misused by him or he is not cooperating in the trial.
7. On the other hand, Mr. M.C. Chaturvedi, learned Senior Advocate/Additional Advocate General, appearing for the State, submits that though the long criminal history of the accused-respondent was brought to the notice of the trial Court at the time of hearing of the bail applications, but the trial Court, except for mentioning one sentence that the accused-respondent had criminal history registered in other police stations, has not dealt with the criminal history of the accused-respondent.
8. I have considered the submissions advanced by the learned counsels for both the parties and, gone through the record of the applications for cancellation of bail granted to the accused-respondent.
9. The accused-respondent is a public figure; he has remained nine times Member of Legislative Assembly of Uttar Pradesh, one time Member of Lok Sabha and one time Member of Rajya Sabha; he has been Senior Minister in the Government of Uttar Pradesh; he has standing in politics; he has set up an University in the name of Mohammad Ali Jauhar University at Rampur. Allegation, in sum & substance, in the FIRs, which are subject matter of this bunch of applications, is that the accused-respondents and other accused forcibly evicted the complainants and their families and occupied their land for the said University.
10. On behalf of the accused-respondents, Mr. Vivek Tankha, learned Senior Advocate, submits that the FIRs came to be registered after 13 years from the date of alleged offence in which charge-sheets have been filed and trial has commenced; at this stage cancellation of bail is not justified; accused-respondent will cooperate in the trial for its early conclusion.
11. Having considered the submissions, this Court is of the view that if the State is of the opinion that despite the criminal history having been brought to the notice of the trial Court, the trial Court has not considered the same, it is always open for the State to move an application before the same Court which has granted the bail. If the accused-respondent is not cooperating in the trial and violating the terms & conditions of the bail then the State has liberty under the law to move an appropriate application, if it so thinks.
12. The learned trial Court should make every endeavour to conclude the trial proceeding at an early date.
13. With the above observation and liberty, if any, these applications stand disposed of.
[D.K. SINGH, J.] Order Date: 03.03.2023 MVS/-