SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(All) 3511

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
SHEKHAR KUMAR YADAV, J.
Akhlakh Ahmad @ Ekhlakh Ahmad - Appellant
Versus
State Of U.P. And Another - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. - 9417 of 2023
Decided On : 07-11-2025

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Avnish Kumar Srivastava, Bhavya Sahai, Sr. Advocate
For the Respondent: G.A., Praveen Kumar Pandey, Sandeep Kumar Mishra

The court emphasized that in cases involving serious and heinous crimes, the interests of society must outweigh individual liberty when assessing bail applications.

Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code - Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 307, 506, 34, 120-B; Explosive Substances Act, Section 3; Criminal Law Amendment Act, Section 7; Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Section 3(2)(5) - Criminal appeal against bail denial - Appellant charged with conspiracy and murder of three individuals including police guards - Need for caution in granting bail in cases involving serious charges; issues of societal impact and witness tampering emphasized - Evidence collected indicates appellant's active role in conspiracy, supported by witness statements - Appellant's request for bail rejected. (Paras 22, 23, 47, 48)

Facts of the case:
The appellant is accused of conspiracy to murder three individuals, including a witness in another case, executed in broad daylight with firearms and explosives. Allegations include providing shelter and financial assistance to the assailants.

Findings of Court:
The court noted the gravity of the crime and the societal impact of the murders, indicating a strong prima facie case against the appellant based on witness testimonies and recovered evidence.

Issues: The primary issue was whether the appellant should be granted bail given the serious nature of the charges and the potential for witness tampering.

Ratio Decidendi: The court highlighted the well-established principles governing bail, emphasizing the balance between individual liberty and societal interest, particularly in heinous crimes. The evidence presented was sufficient to justify denying bail.

Result: Criminal appeal dismissed as lacking merit.

Table of Content
1. facts of the criminal case. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. defense argues absence of solid evidence. (Para 4 , 5)
3. prosecution emphasizes severity of charges. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12)
4. arguments on common intention and influence. (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16)
5. legal precedents for denying bail. (Para 17 , 18 , 19 , 20)
6. court's consideration of community safety. (Para 21 , 22)
7. corroboration of conspiracy allegations. (Para 24 , 25 , 31)
8. evaluation of evidentiary materials. (Para 26 , 27 , 34 , 39 , 42)
9. test for prima facie case in bail. (Para 28 , 29 , 32 , 40)
10. court prioritizes public safety over bail. (Para 33 , 41 , 46 , 47 , 48 , 49)

JUDGMENT :

SHEKHAR KUMAR YADAV, J.

1. Heard Mr Brijesh Sahai, learned Senior counsel assisted by Mr Bhavya Sahai, learned counsel appearing for the appellant, Mr Manish Goyal, learned Addl. Advocate General for the State assisted by Mr Rupak Chaubey, learned AGA-I, Mr Thakur Azad Singh, learned AGA, Mr Praveen Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the informant and perused the record.

2. This criminal appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 23.08.2023 passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Prayagraj in Bail Application No. 4196 of 2023 arising out of Case Crime No. 114/2023, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 307, 506, 34, 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, Section 3 of the Explosive Substances Act, Section 7 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act, and Section 3(2)5 of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, registered at Police Station Dhoomanganj, District Prayagraj.

3. The prosecution story as per the First Information Report dated 25.02.2023 are that the complainant's husband, Umesh Pal alias Krishna Kumar Pal, was a prime witness in the MLA Raju Pal murder case. It is alleged that in 2006, her husband, Umesh Pal alias Krishna Kumar Pal, was abducted, beaten, and forced by former MP Atiq Ahmad and his associates to give a statement in his favour in the Raju Pal murder case. It is alleged that Umesh Pal had filed an FIR regarding that incident. Proceedings in that case were taking place on day to day basis as per the orders of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and Hon'ble High Court. Today, i.e. on February 24, 2023, arguments from the side of the accused were to be held in the aforementioned case. For this reason, on February 24, 2023, her husband, Umesh Pal, along with his security guards Sandeep Nishad and Raghavendra Singh, went to the District Court, Allahabad, in their nephew's car bearing number UP 70 FB 5433. It is alleged that as they got out of the car near their home, the son of former MP Atiq Ahmad, along with Guddu Muslim, Ghulam, and nine other associates, launched deadly attack on her husband and guards with a barrage of bullets and bombs with the intent to kill them. The complainant's husband, Umesh Pal, guard Sandeep Nishad, and guard Raghavendra Singh were badly injured by the bullets and bombs. The driver, Pradeep Sharma, who was sitting in the car, narrowly escaped. The complainant saw the incident on the CCTV screen in her room, and she ran screaming towards the lane. The attackers kept firing weapons and exploding bombs as they fled towards the road, threatening people by saying that anyone who came in front of them would be killed. People became frightened and ran here and there. Chaos ensued. The complainant, her family members, and people from the neighborhood helped in taking her husband Umesh Pal, guard Sandeep Nishad, and guard Raghavendra Singh to the hospital. There, her husband Umesh Pal and guard Sandeep Nishad died, and the other guard, Raghavendra Singh, was seriously injured was undergoing treatment, but his condition remained critical. It is alleged that the murder of her husband Umesh Pal and the guards were conspired by former M.P. Atiq Ahmad, his wife Shaista Parveen, and Atiq Ahmad's brother Ashraf, and was carried out through their sons and associates, which also included Atiq's sons, Guddu Mus

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top