Imran v. State of U.P.
Case brief
What is this about?
The Single Judge granted bail to the applicant, Imran, in an FIR for cow slaughter, allowing release after noting the co-accused's similar bail, lack of independent evidence, and absence of prior criminal history.
What did the court decide?
Bail allowed on furnishing personal bond and two sureties each in like amount.
What the court decided
Court No. - 41
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 30682 of 2018
Applicant :- Imran Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sushil Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
According to the prosecution case, F.I.R. was lodged against four accused persons namely, Mursaleen, Imran, Shameem and Sartaj alleging that on 16.5.2018 accused Mursaleen was arrested by the police with five quintal beef, some instruments for slaughtering and other accused persons Imran, Shameem and Sartaj fled away from the place of occurrence.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that recovery is false and planted. Co-accused namely Sartaz has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 9.8.2018 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 30050 of 2018, since the role of the applicant is not distinguishable with the role of co-accused, therefore, the applicant is also entitled for bail. There is no evidence to connect the applicant with the present matter. Applicant was not arrested on the spot. There is no independent witness against the applicant. Nothing was recovered from the possession of applicant. The applicant is innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case. He is languishing in jail since 30.6.2018 (near about one and half months) having no previous criminal history and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to bail given the co-accused's identical role and lack of independent evidence against him.
Whether the allegations and period of custody warrant the grant of bail.
Parties & counsel
- applicant
Imran
Coram
Aniruddha Singh
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Allahabad HC
- Decided on
- · August
- Registered
- Case no.
- BAIL/30682/2018
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court