In a bail application under Sections 379, 411 IPC, the High Court released the applicant on bail upon furnishing a personal bond and two sureties. The court cited Supreme Court precedent regarding bail principles without expressing a final opinion on the merits of the case.
Released on bail furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in like amount.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 45
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 29983 of 2018
Applicant :- Naushad Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Tapan Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Siddharth,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as the learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record.
The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Naushad with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 989 of 2018, under Sections 379, 411 IPC, Police Station Indirapuram, District- Ghaziabad, during pendency of trial.
The argument is that the allegation against the applicant in the first information report is regarding theft of vehicle No. UP70 AG 1079 while in the recovery memo only the engine number and chesis number have been mentioned and the same does not tallies with the allegations made in the FIR. There is no mention of the engine number and chasis number in the FIR. It may not be conclusively said that the recovered vehicle is stolen vehicle. Applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case with some ulterior motive. The applicant is languishing in jail since 07.5.2018. He does not have any criminal history to his credit except earlier Case Crime No. 234 of 2018, under Sections 411, 414, 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC, Police Station Sadar, District Ghaziabad in pursuance whereof the recovery is alleged to have been made. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.
Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, he does not deserves any indulgence. In case the applicant is released on bail he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail.
Having considered the submissions of the parties and the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Vs.
State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, let the applicant Naushad involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions that :-
In case, of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.
Order Date :- 9.8.2018 Ruchi Agrahari
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant is eligible for bail in a theft case alleging discrepancy in FIR and recovery memo details.
Whether the applicant has a bona fide defence barring his apprehension of remaining in judicial custody.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and anotherReferred¶9
(2018) 3 SCC 22 · Who else cites this
Naushad
Siddharth
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
