Allowed

Saddam v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC1 Aug 2018CRLA/3389/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this criminal appeal, the Single Judge allowed the appeal against the rejection of bail application. The court held that the appellant had made out a case for bail considering his lack of criminal history, period of custody, and injury nature.

What did the court decide?

The appellant Saddam be released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in like amount subject to specified conditions.

Saddam Vs State of U.P. — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 41

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 3389 of 2018

¶3

Appellant :- Saddam Respondent :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Appellant :- Istiyaq Ali,Ali Hasan Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.

¶5

Notice on opposite party no. 2-Shailesh Kumar has been served personally, but no one is present on behalf of the complainant.

¶6

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

¶7

This criminal appeal has been filed against the order dated 13.6.2018 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 1, Bhadohi at Gyanpur in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.348 of 2018 ( Saddam vs. State of U.P.) arising out of Case Crime No. 120 of 2018, under Sections 307, 323, 354-A.D., 504 IPC and Section 11/12 POCSO Act and 3(2)5 of S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station- Aurai, District- Bhadohi whereby bail application of appellant was rejected.

¶8

According to the prosecution case F.I.R. was lodged against four unknown persons riding on Motorcycle, bearing registration no. UP-65BK 5589 alleging that on 21.4.2018 they assaulted Shailesh Kumar and his sister with intent to outrage her modesty. During investigation, the names of Kalam and Saddam were surfaced after one month of the incident.

¶9

Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant is languishing in jail since 19.5.2018 (more than two months); having no criminal history; there is no independent witness; he has been falsely implicated; injuries received by the injured/complainant are simple in nature according to opinion of doctor; he is not named in the F.I.R.; the name of the present appellant was disclosed after one month of the incident and if he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail or tamper with the evidence. He further submits that there is no likelihood of case being heard in near future.

¶10

Learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail but admitted that the appellant has no criminal history.

¶11

For the foregoing discussions, 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 view that the appellant has made out a case for bail. The

¶12

appeal is allowed. Impugned order dated 13.6.2018 rejecting bail of appellant is hereby set aside.

¶13

Let appellant Saddam involved in aforesaid case 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:-

¶14

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

¶15

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

¶16

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

¶17

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.

¶18

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.

¶19

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

¶20

Office is directed to send the lower court record to the concerned court immediately, if it has been received.

¶21

Order Date :- 1.8.2018 OP

Saddam v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Saddam 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

Asif Vs State of U.P.

Ghanshyam Das Vs Anil Gupta and Another

M/S Shree Ram Investment Vs State of U.P. and Others

Vibhu Agrawal and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Hafeez Vs State of U.P.

Sharun Vs State of U.P.