Allowed

mohd. jahid v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC4 Jul 2018BAIL/3309/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal Misc. Bail Application filed by Mohd. Jahid challenging his continued detention. The High Court allowed bail under the U.P. Gangster Act after finding the applicant falsely implicated and having made out a case for release, subject to standard bonding and conduct conditions.

What did the court decide?

Request for bail allowed. Applicant granted release on personal bond and two sureties with conditions to appear in court and not tamper with evidence or intimidate witnesses.

mohd. jahid Vs State of U.P. — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 41

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3309 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Mohd. Jahid Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rajesh Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.

¶5

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

¶6

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that according to gang chart, four cases had been shown against accused applicant and he is on bail. The applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. He is languishing in jail since 14.08.2017 (more than ten months) and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial. It is further submitted that no bail cancellation application has been moved till today regarding the cases shown in the gang chart.

¶7

On the other hand, learned A.G.A opposed the prayer for bail and admitted that there is no criminal history against the applicant except the gang chart and further he could not dispute the aforesaid fact as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶8

Keeping in view the nature of the offence, provision for initiation of cases and release of the accused in U.P.Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention ) Act, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶9

Let the applicant, Mohd.Jahid , involved in Case Crime No.252 of 2017, under section 2/3 U.P.Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station G.R.P. Fort, District Agra, be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:

¶10

(i). The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶11

(ii). The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶12

(iii). The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶13

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

¶14

(v) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any

¶15

inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶16

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

¶17

Order Date :- 4.7.2018 SKD

mohd. jahid v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

mohd. jahid 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

Sadab Vs State of U.P.

Pushpendra Vs State of U.P.

Islam Vs Union of India

Anees Vs State of U.P.

Shyam Bahadur Gaur Vs State of U.P.

Hari Om Vs State of U.P.