Allowed

Rukhsaad v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC11 Oct 2018BAIL/39394/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Single Judge allowed a bail application filed by Rukhsaad in a theft case. The court considered the applicant's custody period, lack of prior record, and absence of identification parade as factors making it a fit case for bail.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail with a personal bond and two sureties subject to standard bail conditions including appearance and non-tampering.

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

¶1

Court No. - 41

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 39394 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Rukhsaad Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rishi Kant Rai,Ashish Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.

¶5

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

¶6

According to the prosecution case one motorcycle of the complainant was stolen on 24.7.2018 and that was recovered from the possession of the applicant.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 30.7.2018 (more than two months); having no previous previous criminal history; the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case; no identification parade of person and property was conducted; there is no independent witness and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.

¶8

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 and admitted that the applicant has no previous criminal history.

¶9

Considering the submission of learned counsel for the parties, facts of the case, nature of allegation and period of custody, gravity of offence and 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 the applicant Rukhsaad involved in Case Crime No. 776 of 2018, under Sections 411, 413, 414 I.P.C., P.S.-Civil Lines, District-Moradabad 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:

¶11

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

¶12

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

¶13

3.The appellant will appear before the trial court on the date

¶14

fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶15

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.

¶16

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.

¶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 :- 11.10.2018 OP

Rukhsaad v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rukhsaad 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

Shahid Vs State of U.P.

Mahendra Bhatt and Another Vs State of U.P.

Sonu Mishra Vs State of U.P.

Uttam Vs State of U.P. and Another

Mahesh Vs State of U.P.

Suraj Kumar @ Pramod Kumar Yadav Vs State of U.P.