This bail application was heard by Court No. 41. The applicant, facing arrest for loot, claimed innocent implication and lack of FIR naming. The court, noting no criminal record and plant evidence claims, allowed bail on furnishing a surety bond.
Release on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties subject to standard conditions.
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. - 41 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 37589 of 2018 Applicant :- Shekh Rafeeq Alias Shafeeq Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sanjay Singh 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 the F.I.R. was lodged against two accused persons namely, Satyendra and Raja Ul Islam alleging that on 26.7.2018 they looted Rs.2.50 lac from the complainant. During investigation, accused Dinesh Kumar, Mohd. Khalid and applicant were arrested by the Police personnel.
Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 27.7.2018 (more than two months); having no criminal history; recovery of Rs.2.50 lac was planted by the Police; there is no independent witness, he is not named in the F.I.R. With regard to person and property, identification parade has not been conducted. 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.
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, admitted that the applicant has no criminal history.
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.
Let the applicant Shekh Rafeeq Alias Shafeeq involved in Case Crime No. 474 of 2018, under Sections 395 and 412 I.P.C., P.S. Kotwali, 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 with the following conditions:
2.The appellant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.
3.The appellant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.
4.The appellant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.
5.The appellant 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.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail.
Order Date :- 4.10.2018//A. Singh
1 issue framed by the court
Whether to allow bail to the applicant accused under Sections 395 and 412 IPC in a theft and criminal mischief case.
Shekh Rafeeq Alias Shafeeq
Aniruddha Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
