Allowed

Inam and Another v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC12 Feb 2018BAIL/5237/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed the criminal miscellaneous bail application filed by Inam and another, holding them to be a fit case for bail considering their innocence, lack of criminal history, and a verified out-of-court compromise between the parties.

What did the court decide?

Applicants Inam and Ikram released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each, subject to specific conditions.

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

¶1

Court No. - 22

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5237 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Inam And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sayeed Saif Ullah,Sufia Saba Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.

¶5

Vakalatnama filed today by Sri Chaudhari Dilnishar, Advocate on behalf of complainant is taken on record.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned counsel for the complainant as well as learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.

¶7

According to prosecution case, the F.I.R. was lodged against three accused persons, namely, Imran, Inam and Ikram; alleging that on 1.10.2017 they assaulted the injured, namely, Amzad with lathi-dand who has received head injury.

¶8

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case. There is general allegations against all accused. Offences levelled against the applicants are not attracted in the present case. Injuries found on the body of the injured are simple in nature. Injuries are not dangerous to life. Compromise has been taken place between the parties out of court. Applicants have no criminal history. They are languishing in jail since 6.12.2017 (more than two month) and in case they are released on bail, they will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.

¶9

Sri Chaudhari Dilnishar, learned counsel for the complainant admitted that compromise has been taken place between the parties out of court.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid fact as argued by learned counsel for the applicants and admitted that applicants have no criminal history.

¶11

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.

¶12

Let the applicants Inam and Ikram involved in Case Crime No. 404 of 2017, under Sections 308, 452, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Chilkana, District Saharanpur 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:

¶13

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

¶14

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

¶15

3.The applicants will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless

¶16

personal presence is exempted.

¶17

4.The applicants shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which they are accused, or suspected, of the commission of which they are suspected.

¶18

5.The applicants 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 them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶19

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail.

¶20

Order Date :- 12.2.2018 A. Singh

Inam and Another v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Inam and Another 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

Saurabh Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Anwar Vs State of U.P.

Rameshwar Vs State of U.P.

Abid and 3 Ors. Vs State of U.P.

Manju Vs State of U.P.

Smt. Nanhi Devi Vs State of U.P.