Allowed

Sharif and Another v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC19 Jan 2018BAIL/2058/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal Misc. Bail Application where the court granted bail to applicants charged under Sections 392 and 411 I.P.C. despite the prosecution's claim of witness tampering risk, allowing them to furnish a personal bond with sureties.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail by furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each, subject to conditions of court attendance, non-tampering, and no illegal activities.

Sharif and Another Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 23

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2058 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Sharif And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Vijay Bahadur Shivhare Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Vijay Bahadur Shivhare, learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. appearing for the State.

¶6

Learned counsel for the applicants in support of his prayer for bail submits that the applicants are innocent and they have been falsely implicated in the present case. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that as per the prosecution version, the incident has taken place on 5.11.2017, wheres the FIR has been lodged on 9.10.2017 with the delay of four days. There is no cogent evidence against the applicants. The recovery, which has been shown from the possession of the applicant is planted one. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicants 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 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 9.11.2017.

¶7

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the applicants have a criminal history to their credit.

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

¶9

Let the applicants Sharif and Kallo @ Khabulla involved in Case Crime No. 253 of 2017, under Sections 392 and 411 I.P.C., Police Station Muskara, District Hamirpur 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:-

¶10

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

¶11

They will not tamper with the witnesses.

¶12

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

¶13

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

¶14

Order Date :- 19.1.2018

¶15

Sumaira

Sharif and Another v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sharif 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

Manpal Vs State of U.P.

Sarita Vs State of U.P.

Kuldeep Vs State of U.P.

Ajay Singh @ Ajju Vs State of U.P.

Sandeep Maan Vs State of U.P.

Jugal Kishor Ahirwar and Another Vs State of U.P.