{"id":302931,"date":"2023-02-20T17:09:55","date_gmt":"2023-02-20T11:39:55","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.indialegallive.com\/?p=302931"},"modified":"2023-02-20T17:09:58","modified_gmt":"2023-02-20T11:39:58","slug":"allahabad-high-court-sets-aside-bail-granted-to-azam-khan-aide","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.indialegallive.com\/constitutional-law-news\/courts-news\/allahabad-high-court-sets-aside-bail-granted-to-azam-khan-aide\/","title":{"rendered":"Allahabad High Court sets aside bail granted to Azam Khan aide"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
In the Yateemkhana demolition case, the Allahabad High Court cancelled the bail granted to Fasahat Ali Khan alias Sanu, a close aide of former minister Azam Khan, by the special court Rampur on July 29, 2020.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A single-bench of Justice Dinesh Kumar Singh passed this order while hearing a Criminal Misc Bail Cancellation Application filed by the State of Uttar Pradesh.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The application under Section 439(2) CrPC have been filed seeking cancellation of the order dated 29.7.2020 passed by the Special Judge (MP\/MLA)\/Additional Sessions Judge, Rampur in Bail Application filed in FIR under Sections 452, 427, 504, 323, 506, 395, 448, 120-B and 412 IPC, Police Station Kotwali, District Rampur, whereby the trial court has admitted the accused-respondent on bail.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
As per the FIR, the complainant has been living in the Orphanage (Yateemkhana) at Sarai Gate, Rampur with his family. The house was allotted to him and he is having receipts of rent being paid by him.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
On 15.10.2016 at around 5.20 PM, the then Circle Officer (City) Ale Hasan, Fasahat Shanu, Islam (Contractor), SOG Constable Dharmendra, Virendra Goel and 15-20 other persons came to his house and threatened him to vacate his house.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
They were saying that Azam Khan would construct a school at Yateemkhana and the land of Yateemkhana was required for construction of the school.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
When the complainant objected and refused to vacate the premises, he was assaulted and threatened. The accused did not stop, but they forcibly threw out the family members from the house and demolished his house by bulldozer. It was further said that the accused had looted Rs 20,000 from the house.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
“During the course of investigation, some looted articles were recovered from the possession of the accused-respondent and he had confessed the crime during the course of investigation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Trial court has not considered the grievous nature of the offence nor it has considered the long criminal history of the accused-respondent while enlarging him on bail.<\/p>\n\n\n\n