Allowed

Atikurahman v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC6 Jul 2018BAIL/20849/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this bail application, the petitioner appealed for release pending trial in a case involving cow slaughter, attempted murder, and communal riots. The court observed that co-accused were already on bail, the petitioner had no criminal history, and no evidence was recovered from him, granting the bail application.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

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

¶1

Court No. - 41

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 20849 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Atikurahman Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sudhir Kumar Agarwal,Naveen Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶6

According to the prosecution case the F.I.R. was lodged against 22 accused persons including the present applicant alleging that on 6.2.2018 524 skins of animals and six quintal beef and other raw materials were recovered from the possession of the accused person. Zubaid Quraishi, Aklakh Quraishi, Afroz Ahmad Quraishi, Ishtehak, Ahmad Ali, Nijamuddin and Atiqur Rahman were arrested by the police personnel and rest of the accused fled away.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that co-accused, namely Zubaid Quraishi, Afroz Ahmad Quraishi, Ahmad Ali, Ishtehak, Akhlaq Quraishi and Nizamuddin have been enlarged on bail by this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 20466 of 2018, 15740 of 2018 and 15742 of 2018 vide orders dated 19.6.2018, 24.5.2018 and 24.5.2018 respectively. Learned counsel for the applicant further submitted that since the role of the applicant is not distinguishable with the role of co-accused, the applicant is also entitled for bail. The applicant is languishing in jail since 6.2.2018 (about five months); having no criminal history; there is no independent witness against the applicant. Nothing was recovered from the possession of applicant. The applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.

¶8

On the other hand, learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid fact as argued by learned counsel for the applicant.

¶9

Considering the submission of learned counsel for the parties, facts of the case, nature of allegation and period of custody, gravity of offence, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the opinion that it is a fit case for bail. Hence, the bail application is hereby allowed.

¶10

Let the applicant Atikurahman involved in Case Crime No. 50 of 2018, under Sections 147, 148, 307, 353 I.P.C., Section 3/5/8 Cow Slaughter Act, Section 11 Animal Cruelty Act and 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act, P.S. Kotwali Padrauna, District Kushi Nagar be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

¶11

Order Date :- 6.7.2018 OP

Atikurahman v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Atikurahman 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

Parasuram Vs State of U.P. and Another

Vinod Alias Kallu Vs State of U.P. and Another

Saroon Vs State of U.P.

Veer Vrat @ Ravi Vs State of U.P.

Suraj Vs State of U.P.

Chhote Vs State of U.P.