Skip to content

The research platform for Indian law — judgements, legislation and the citations between them. Free to search, with the original document behind every result.

A product of LawSathi.

Research

Search Legislation Research tools

Browse

Courts Case types Topics Most-cited judgements Sources

LawSathi

Practice platform Blog

© 2026 LawSathiTerms PrivacyResearch aid, not the official record.

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

Home
Allahabad HC
2018
Imran Vs State of U.P.Imran v. State of U.P.

Allowed

Imran v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC10 Aug 2018BAIL/48472/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Grants bail to applicant Imran in IPC and POCSO offenses, relying on the parity principle as a similarly placed co-accused was enlarged on bail.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail upon furnishing personal bond and two reliable sureties subject to standard conditions.

What the court decided

AI extract

A

Court No. - 52

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 48472 of 2017

Applicant :- Imran Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sunil Kumar Dwivedi,Raj Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon'ble Rajul Bhargava,J.

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

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant- Imran in Case Crime No. 72 of 2017, under Sections 376-D, 323, 354 Ka (1) I.P.C. and 5/6 of Prevention of Children from Sexual Offence Act, Police StationDhaulana, District- Hapur with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.

This is second bail application, the first bail application was rejected by Hon'ble V. K. Mishra, J. (since retired) by an order dated 09.10.2017. Learned counsel for the applicant states that this second bail application has been moved on a fresh ground that similarly placed co-accused Shahid against whom the prosecutrix has also levelled allegation of rape and of outraging her modesty has been enlarged on bail vide Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 43616 of 2017 by a very detailed order dated 13.11.2017. He further submitted that as per the prosecutrix she was 19 years of age and the case of the applicant stands at par with that of the co-accused. There is no early prospect of conclusion of trial. So, the applicant, who is in jail since 06.05.2017, having no criminal history to his credit, deserves to be released on bail.

Issues for consideration

1 issue framed by the court

AI extract

1.
Whether bail should be granted to the applicant on the ground of parity with a similarly placed co-accused who has already been released on bail.

Parties & counsel

AI extract

applicant
Imran

Coram

AI extract

Rajul Bhargava

Case details

As recorded by the court registry

Court: Allahabad HC
Decided on: 10 Aug 2018 · August
Registered: 7 Dec 2017
Case no.: BAIL/48472/2017

Similar cases

Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court

Finding judgements on the same questions…

More from Rajul Bhargava

Yunus Vs State of U.P. and Another
9 Aug 2018
Ravindra Vs State of U.P.
9 Aug 2018
Vinay Kumar Vs State of U.P.
9 Aug 2018
Hari Kishan Vs Sate of U.P.
10 Aug 2018
Naushad Vs State of U.P.

Cite this judgement

Imran v. State of U.P., BAIL/48472/2017 (ALL), decided on 10 August 2018.

The Allahabad High Court publishes no neutral citation for this judgement — cite it by case number and date of decision.

Bench / Coram

Rajul Bhargava

Parties & counsel

Outcome

Released on bail upon furnishing personal bond and two reliable sureties subject to standard conditions.

Issue for consideration

Whether bail should be granted to the applicant on the ground of parity with a similarly placed co-accused who has already been released on bail.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail granted under Sections 376-D, 323, 354-I.P.C. and Section 5/6 POCSO Act. Held that on principles of parity, co-accused charged similarly and detained should be released on bail where another similarly placed accused has already been granted bail. Conditions include furnishing bond and sureties, not tampering with evidence, not pressuring witnesses, and appearing on dates.

A compact analysis

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.

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant but could not point out anything material to the contrary.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as also that the coaccused has already been enlarged on bail, on the ground of parity I am of the view that the applicant also is entitled to be released on bail.

Let applicant- Imran be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions that:-

1.The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence;

2.The applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses;

3.The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court.

In case of default of any of the conditions enumerated above, the courts below shall be at liberty to cancel bail of the applicant.

Order Date :- 10.8.2018 Vikas/-

CNR

UPHC011614812017

Topic

Bail and Remand

Bench

Disposal

Allowed/Partly Allowed on merits

10 Aug 2018

Shahzad Vs State of U.P.

10 Aug 2018