Dismissed

Shri Mohd. Sharif v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC4 Oct 2018BAILC/2209/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed the bail cancellation application as it is not maintainable before the High Court but lies with the Session Judge. The application was disposed of with liberty to file a fresh application before the trial court to be decided on merit.

What did the court decide?

Application disposed off with liberty to file fresh bail cancellation application before the trial Court.

Shri Mohd. Sharif Vs State of U.P. and… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 41

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL CANCELLATION APPLICATION No. - 2209 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Shri Mohd. Sharif Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ravindra Pratap Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant/complainant and learned AGA. Perused the record.

¶6

This bail cancellation application has been moved by the applicant/complainant to cancel bail granted vide order dated 12.3.2018 passed by Sessions Judge, Allahabad in Bail application No. 903 of 2018 arising out of Case Crime No. 45 of 2018 under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Koraon, District Allahabad whereby opposite party No. 2 was enlarged on bail.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant/complainant submitted that bail cancellation application of complainant may be disposed off with liberty to file a fresh bail cancellation application before the lower Court.

¶8

In the case of Shahzad Hasan Khan v. Ishtiq, AIR 1987 SC 1613 , the Apex Court has held that in the absence of sufficient materials to show that the accused was threatening the informant, bail granted cannot be cancelled.

¶9

In the case of Daulat Ram Vs. State of Haryana, AIR 1995 SC 1998 it was held by the Hon'ble Apex Court that the order under this section may be passed on the following grounds:-

¶10

"1. When the accused is found tampering with the evidence either during the investigation or during the trial.

¶11

When the persons on bail commits similar offence or any heinous offence during the period of bail.

¶12

When the accused has absconded and trial of the case gets delayed on that account.

¶13

When the offence so committed by the accused had created serious law and order problem in the society and accused had become a hazard on the peaceful living of the people.

¶14

If the High Court finds that the lower Court granting bail

¶15

has exercised its judicial power wrongly.

¶16

If the High Court or Sessions Courts find that the accused has misused the privilege of bail.

¶17

If the life of the accused itself be in danger."

¶18

Moreover, in view of law laid down in the case of Abdul Basit @ Raju and others vs. Mohd. Abdul Kadir Chaudhary and another (2014) 10 SCC 754 , this application would lie before the Court of Session Judge, not before the High Court, hence application is disposed off with liberty to file fresh bail cancellation application before the trial Court and if applicant files bail cancellation application, it is expected from the trial Court to decide the same on merit in accordance with law expeditiously.

¶19

Certify this order to the lower court immediately.

¶20

Order Date :- 4.10.2018 P.P.

Shri Mohd. Sharif v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shri Mohd. Sharif v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Imran Vs State of U.P.

Aakash Vs State of U.P.

Hafiz Vs State of U.P.

Umesh Verma Vs State of U.P.

Shekh Rafeeq Alias Shafeeq Vs State of U.P.

Vishnu @ Bantu Yadav Vs State of U.P.