Allowed

Pappu @ Vikaruddin v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC23 Mar 2018BAIL/10855/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 10855 of 2018, the court granted bail to the applicant accused under Section 392 IPC. The applicant claimed false implicaton and cooperation, leading to an order releasing him on personal bond with sureties.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail via personal bond with two sureties, subject to conditions including attendance and non-tampering.

Pappu @ Vikaruddin Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 23

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 10855 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Pappu @ Vikaruddin Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Gajendra Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Gajendra Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Abhinav Prasad, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State.

¶6

It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. It is next contended that the applicant was not named in the first information report and his name has come into light during the course of investigation. It is further submitted that the applicant has no concern with the alleged incident. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused has also been touched upon at length. It has been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required. It has also been submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 15.9.2017. It has been pointed out that the applicant has no criminal history.

¶7

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail.

¶8

Considering the nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tempering of the witnesses and prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge and reformative theory of punishment the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case.

¶9

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case let the applicant Pappu @ Vikaruddin involved in Case Crime No.784 of 2017, under Sections 392 I.P.C., Police Station Civil Line, District

¶10

Budaun be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions.

¶11

The applicant will continue to attend and co-operate in the trial pending before the court concerned on the date fixed after release.

¶12

He will not tamper with the witnesses.

¶13

He will not indulge in any illegal activities during the bail period.

¶14

It is further directed that the identity, status and residence proof of the sureties be verified by the authorities concerned before they are accepted.

¶15

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the trial court will be at liberty to cancel the bail.

¶16

Order Date :- 23.3.2018 Dev/-

Pappu @ Vikaruddin v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pappu @ Vikaruddin v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Tarun Vs State of U.P.

Pramod Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Aftab Vs State of U.P.

Ali Mohammad @ Mohammad Ali Vs State of U.P.

Santosh Singh Vs State of U.P.

Pappu @ Vikaruddin Vs State of U.P.