Allowed

Nafees v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC14 May 2018BAIL/17722/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Application for bail under Section 437 CrPC in a murder case. The sole judge considered parity of the applicant's role with a co-accused already released and granted bail, without expressing an opinion on the merits or the strength of the prosecution evidence.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail with a personal bond and two sureties subject to conditions against tampering and appearing in court.

Nafees Vs State of U.P. — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 55

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 17722 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Nafees Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Nazrul Islam Jafri Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Dheeraj Singh (Bohra)

¶4

Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Dheeraj Singh Bohra, learned counsel for complainant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶6

According to prosecution case, the first information report was lodged on 12th January, 2018 at 5:34 p.m. by the complainant/informant Devindra Man brother of the deceased Jitendra Man against unknown persons alleging that on 12th January, 2018 at about 01:00 p.m. the complainant was informed about the death of his brother and his dead body was lying in his flat. On said information, when he entered into his flat along with other relatives, he saw that the dead body was lying on the floor of the flat. Some blood were oozing on his head, he was killed by some one. The case was registered under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. During investigation, it was found that there was an illicit relation between one Smt. Shrishti Gupta and the deceased. The deceased during the relation had obtained some photographs and videos of Shrishti Gupta, hence a quarrel was started between them, thereafter Smt. Shrishti Gupta had made illicit relationship with the applicant Imran.

¶7

From the CC TV footage, it was found that on 10th January, 2018 between 12:00 to 04:15, Shrishti Gupta was available in the flat of the deceased. She entered into the flat at 12 and returned at 04:15. On 17th January, 2018, Smt. Shristi Gupta, the applicant Imran and Nafeesh (driver of Imran) were arrested by the police. One country made pistol was recovered from the applicant. Blood stained Jeans, keys of flat and one mobile phone were recovered from Shrishti Gupta. They confessed before the Police. After investigation charge-sheet was submitted under Sections 302 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code against Shrishti Gupta and under Section 120-B against Imran and Nafeesh only.

¶8

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the co-accused Imran has already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 24.4.2018 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 15057 of 2018; the role of the applicant is identical to the co-accused who has already been enlarged on bail, he is also entitled to be enlarged on bail on the ground of parity; the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to so called friendship with Shrishti Gupta. No specific role is assigned against the applicant. There is no legal evidence except confessional statement of Shrishti Gupta and the applicant before the police. So called recovery of pistol was planted by the police. It is stated that the fact as to whether murder of the deceased was done by the said pistol or not is not established. The applicant is not named in the first information report. This case is based on circumstantial evidence and no chain has been established against the applicant. There is general allegation against the applicant. Main role has been assigned to co-accused

¶9

Shrishti Gupta. Offences levelled against the applicant are not attracted in the present case. There is no independent witness against the applicant. The prosecution case is based on suspicion so far as the applicant is concerned. Shrishti Gupta has confined in her statement that she killed the deceased by shot fire. From the C.C.T.V. footage, it was found that on 10th January, 2018 between 12:00 to 04:15, Shrishti Gupta was available in the flat of the deceased. She entered into the flat at 12 and returned at 04:15. in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial; he is languishing in jail since 18.01.2018 (more than three and half months) having no criminal history.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail and admitted that he has received no criminal history against this accused, the role of this accused is identical to the role of the accused who have already been enlarged on bail.

¶11

Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. and the fact that identically placed co-accused has already been enlarged on bail by this Court, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, it is deemed fit to enlarge the applicant on bail.

¶12

Let the applicant Nafees involved in the Case Crime No. 40 of 2018, under Sections 302, 120-B I.P.C., P.S. Surajpur, District Gautam Budh Nagar, be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:

¶13

i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.

¶14

ii) The applicant shall not threaten or harass the prosecution witnesses.

¶15

iii) The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court.

¶16

iv) The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which the applicant is accused, or suspected of the commission, of which applicant is suspected.

¶17

v) The applicant shall not directly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade the applicant from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶18

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

¶19

Order Date :- 14.5.2018

¶20

shiv

Nafees v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nafees 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

Jaihind Vs State of U.P.

Gaurav Vs State of U.P.

Suresh Vs State of U.P.

Surendra Yadav Alias Mulayam Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Ramesh Prajapati and Another Vs State of U.P.

Jahangir Vs State of U.P.