Allowed

Muzaffar and Another v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC12 Mar 2018BAIL/1587/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court allowed bail to Muzaffar and Zameer in a case involving theft of petrol. The court noted allegations of false implication and lack of independent witnesses, holding that the co-accused had been released on bail. Bail was granted subject to personal bond and sureties.

What did the court decide?

Respondents released on bail by furnishing personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount.

Muzaffar and Another Vs State of U.P. — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 23

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1587 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Muzaffar And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Anand Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of the applicant is taken on record..

¶6

Heard Sri A.K.Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Purshottam Maurya, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State.

¶7

The supplementary affidavit has been moved today for correcting the name of applicant no.2, Zameer in place of Zameen.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicants is permitted to make necessary correction in the memo of bail application.

¶9

The correction is allowed and the name of applicant no.2,Zameer is deleted and its place the name of applicant no.2 Zameer is substituted and the same shall be reread as such.

¶10

Office is directed to check the same and correct it accordingly.

¶11

It is alleged that unknown persons stolen petrol worth Rs. 1,35,000/- from the Petrol Diesel Tank in the intervening night of 12/13.10.2017.

¶12

Learned counsel for the applicants in support of their prayer for bail submits that the applicants are innocent and they have has been falsely implicated in the present case due ulterior motive and they have committed no offence.It is next contended that the report was lodged against unknown persons. False recovery has been shown against the applicants and there is no independent witness of the alleged recovery. Other co-accused namely Prempal, Virendra Naresh and Jeevan having similar role to that of the applicants have already been released on bail by this Court on 1.2.2018 and 6.2.2018 respectively, copies of which have been produced by the applicants' counsel, which are taken on record, hence the applicants are also entitled to be released on bail on the ground of parity. 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

¶13

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 applicants that they are ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make themselves available before the court whenever required. It has also been submitted that the applicants are languishing in jail since 15.11.2017.

¶14

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

¶15

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 the applicants are entitled to be released on bail in this case.

¶16

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case let the applicants namely Muzaffar and Zameer involved in Case Crime No.493 of 2017, under Sections 379, 411 I.P.C., Police Station Hayat Nagar, District Sambhal be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶17

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

¶18

They will not tamper with the witnesses.

¶19

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

¶20

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

¶21

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

¶22

Order Date :- 12.3.2018

¶23

Muzaffar and Another v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Muzaffar and Another 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Narendra Sharma@ Bantu Pandit Vs State of U.P.

Ashish Singh Vs State of U.P.

Akram Vs State of U.P.

Atul Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Rajan Yadav @ Sodhan Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Gabbar and Another Vs State of U.P.