Allowed

Farman v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC13 Mar 2019BAIL/10780/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the bail application of the accused Farman in a case involving cruelty to a married woman and death by negligence, ordering his release on a personal bond with two sureties subject to standard bail conditions.

What did the court decide?

Release of applicant on personal bond and two reliable sureties subject to conditions against tampering with evidence and cooperating with trial.

Farman Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 23

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 10780 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Farman Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Adesh Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rajendra Kumar-IV,J.

¶5

Heard Shri Adesh Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for State and perused the material available record.

¶6

This bail application has been filed by the accusedapplicant Farman, who is involved in Case Crime No. 965 of 2018, under Sections 498-A, 304-B IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Lisadigate, District Meerut.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant has been falsely implicated in this case due to dewar of the deceased and there is general allegation against him. Coaccused Smt. Khatoon (mother-in-law) has been granted bail by another Bench of this Court vide order dated 20.02.2019 passed in Criminal Misc. Case No.7276 of 2019. It is further submitted that the case of the applicant is on same footing of co-accused Bilal who is also dewar of the deceased has been granted bail by another Bench of this Court on 26.02.2019 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.8234 of 2019. It is next submitted that the applicant is neither a previous convict nor he has any previous criminal history and he is in jail since 31.07.2018. It is further submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses. Keeping in view the discrepancy as well as parity of co-accused Bilal who is also dewar of deceased, the applicant is entitled for bail. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶8

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but did not dispute the factual submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶9

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and rival contention of learned counsel, without commenting upon the merit of the case, I am of the opinion that the accused applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶10

Accordingly, bail application is allowed.

¶11

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

¶12

The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.

¶13

The applicant shall co-operate with the trial and shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for charge, evidence when the witnesses are present in the court, statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and argument.

¶14

During trial, he shall not indulge in any criminal activities.

¶15

In breach of any condition enumerated above, Trial Court shall be at liberty to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.

¶16

Order Date :- 13.3.2019 I.A.Siddiqui

Farman v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Farman 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

Hasina and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ram vilas Vs state of up and another

Imtiyaz Ahmed Vs State of U.P.

Dharamraj Vs State of U.P.

Ajeet Singh Vs State of U.P.

Lalit Vs State of U.P.