Allowed

Ujma v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC17 Nov 2018BAIL/43920/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Criminal Misc. Bail Application was allowed. The applicant, a female with two minor children and no criminal history, was held innocent of the charge of cattle slaughter. Bail was granted subject to standard conditions including availability for trial and not tampering with evidence.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail upon furnishing a personal bond and two sureties, subject to conditions against tampering with evidence and appearing for trial.

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

¶1

Court No. - 27

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 43920 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Ujma Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Shyam Sunder 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, Mohd. Rais, Ujma, Nawshad, Guddu, Imran, Hakkal, Afasar Ali and two unknown persons alleging that on 15.9.2018 accused Mohd. Rais, Ujma were arrested by the police with 65 Kg. beef and some instruments for slaughtering and other accused fled away.

¶7

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that recovery is false and planted. The applicant is the lady and having two minor children. There is no evidence to connect the applicant with the present matter. There is no independent witness against the applicant. Nothing was recovered from the possession of applicant. The applicant is innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case. She is languishing in jail since 15.9.2018 (more than two months) having no criminal history and in case she is released on bail, she 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 applicant has no 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, 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 Ujma involved in Case Crime No. 757 of 2018, under Section 3/5/8 Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act, P.S. Kotwali, District Fatehpur 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:

¶11

The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during

¶12

the trial.

¶13

The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶14

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

¶15

The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which she is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which she is suspected.

¶16

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 her 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 :- 17.11.2018

¶19

A. Singh

Ujma v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ujma 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

Yasin Vs State of U.P.

Islamuddin Vs State of U.P.

Rohit Vs State of U.P.

Naved Ahmad Vs State of U.P.

Talib Vs State of U.P.

Sunil and Another Vs State of U.P.