Allowed

Maiyadeen v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC20 Aug 2018BAIL/15886/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal Misc. Bail Application filed by Maiyadeen against the State of U.P. The Court released the applicant on bail with personal bond and two heavy sureties, subject to standard conditions including attendance in court and no tampering with witnesses.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail with personal bond and two heavy sureties subject to undertaking to attend trial and not tamper with witnesses.

Maiyadeen Vs State of U.P. — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 55

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 15886 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Maiyadeen Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- P.K. Singh,Kuldeep Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

Heard Sri P.K. Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Sanjay Singh, 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 alleged incident is said to have taken place on 21.2.2018 and first information report for the same has been lodged on 22.2.2018 for which no plausible explanation has been given by the prosecution. It is further submitted that the victim is the bhanji of the applicant and no offence as alleged has been committed by the applicant. 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 24.2.2018. 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

¶10

applicant Maiyadeen involved in Case Crime No.25 of 2018, under Sections 452, 354(Ka), 324, 323 and 506 I.P.C. and Section 8 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offence Act (POCSO), Police Station Atarra, District Banda be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two heavy 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 :- 20.8.2018 Dev/-

Maiyadeen v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Maiyadeen 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

Amit Vs State of U.P.

Aditya @ Golu Vs State of U.P.

Kanhaiya Vs State of U.P.

Sandeep @ Sagar Vs State of U.P.

Manish Vs State of U.P.

Uady Bhan Sahni Vs State of U.P.