Allowed

Shahrukh v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC14 Nov 2018BAIL/43136/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under the U.P. Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act, the court allowed the release of the applicant. The court noted the release of a co-accused in an identical case and the applicant's clean record, finding it a fit case for bail.

What did the court decide?

Release of the applicant on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties, subject to specific conditions of not tampering with evidence and appearing for trial.

Shahrukh Vs State of U.P. — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 27

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 43136 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Shahrukh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Kaushal Kumar Pandey,Anand Ji 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, F.I.R. was lodged against seven accused persons, namely Hakim @ Hakmeen, Yusuf, Mafuz, Shahrukh, Iqrar, Farman and Shabbu alleging that on 13.8.2018, Hakim @ Hakmin, Yusuf and Mafuz were arrested by the Police personnel and 150 kg beef was recovered. Rest of the four accused fled away from the place of occurrence.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that co-accusedHakim @ Hakmeen has been enlarged on bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 27.10.2018 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 41103 of 2018 and the case of the applicant is identical to the case of co-accused who has been enlarged on bail; hence the applicant is also entitled for the same benefit; the applicant is languishing in jail since 8.9.2018 (more than two months); having no criminal history; nothing was recovered on the pointing out the applicant or from possession of the applicant; recovery shown by the Police is false; there is no independent witness; 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.

¶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 criminal history and the case of the applicant is identical to the case of co-accused- Hakim @ Hakmeen, who has been enlarged on bail by this Court.

¶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 the applicant Shahrukh involved in Case Crime No. 514 of

¶11

2018, under Section 3/5A/8 of U.P. Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act, P.S.-Gajraula, District-Amroha 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:

¶12

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

¶13

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

¶14

3.The appellant will appear before the trial court on the date 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 :- 14.11.2018 OP

Shahrukh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shahrukh 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

Bantu and Another Vs State of U.P.

Raj Gagan Vs State of U.P.

Kanahaiya Lal Vs State of U.P. and Another

Hayat Vs State of U.P.

Javed Vs State of U.P.

Mohd. Rafi Vs State of U.P.