Allowed

Imran v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC3 Oct 2018BAIL/37544/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed the bail application of Imran, an accused under Section 328, 392, and 411 IPC, noting that a co-accused with an identical case profile had already been granted bail by a coordinate bench. The Court issued the order without expressing an opinion on the merits of the case.

What did the court decide?

Accused released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties subject to standard bail conditions including appearance and non-tampering.

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

¶1

Court No. - 41

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 37544 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Imran Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sanjay Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.

¶5

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

¶6

According to prosecution case, F.I.R. was lodged against Faizan and two unknown persons alleging that on 13.3.2018, accused Faizan booked e-rickshaw of complainant Mushtak. On 14.3.2018 complainant was driving his e-rickshaw and accused were sitting in said e- rickshaw after reaching at Pahadi Gate accused persons looted his e-rickshaw. During investigation, the name of three accused persons namely Naseem Miyan, Jaffar Khan and Imran were surfaced.

¶7

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that coaccused namely Zafar Khan has already been granted bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 9.8.2018 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 30090 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. The applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. Offences levelled against the applicant are not attracted in the present case. Nothing was recovered from the possession of applicant. There is no independent witness against the applicant. He is languishing in jail since 26.3.2018 (more than six 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.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid fact as argued by learned counsel for the applicant and admitted that applicant has no previous criminal history and the case of present applicant is identical to co-accused Zafar Khan who has been enlarged on bail.

¶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 applicant Imran involved in Case Crime No. 153 of

¶11

2018, under Sections 328, 392, 411 IPC, Police Station Ganj, District Rampur be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:

¶12

The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶13

2.The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶14

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

¶15

4.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.

¶16

5.The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any 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.

¶17

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

¶18

Order Date :- 3.10.2018 A. Singh

Imran v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Imran 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Riwai Bind Vs State of U.P.

Wajid Vs State of U.P.

Athar Vs State of U.P.

Aakash Vs State of U.P.

Hafiz Vs State of U.P.

Jitendra Singh Vs State of U.P.