MANSOOR ALAM VERSUS STATE OF U.P.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 91 OF 2015

(ARISING OUT OF SLP (CRL) NO.9247 of 2013)

MANSOOR ALAM …APPELLANT

VERSUS

STATE OF U.P. & ANR. …RESPONDENTS

 

The matter came up for hearing after notice was issued and finding that respondent No.2 had failed to appear, bailable warrants were directed to be issued against respondent No.2.Letter dated 27th September, 2014 has been received from the trial Court stating that respondent No.2 is still in custody. It appears that he has not been able to furnish the bail bonds. The additional documents have been filed on behalf of the State. It has been pointed out that the second respondent was facing trial in cases being FIR No.46 of 2004 in Case Crime No.104 of 2004 u/s 323,307 IPC, PS Anwrganj, Kanpur Nagar and FIR No.142 of 2006 in Crime Case No.221 of 2006 u/s 3(1) of the U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986. In Crime Case No.140 of2005 u/s 110 Cr.P.C. dated 22nd July, 2005, the respondent was ordered to file a bond for Good Behaviour which he had filed on12th September, 2012. A perusal of the impugned order of the High Court shows that the antecedents of respondent No.2 have not been taken into account. Respondent No.2 has not furnished bail bond in pursuance of the order of the High Court and has continued to remain in prison. We are thus of the view that order granting bail, in the facts and circumstances, is not called for. There is no doubt that respondent No.2 appears to have undergone imprisonment for more than eight years, but the contention raised on behalf of the appellant that the respondent has criminal antecedents and direct role in the murder which render the order granting bail vulnerable cannot to be brushed aside….read more