Allowed

Kasim @ Gama v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC14 Mar 2019BAIL/11020/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A criminal bail application for an accused in a kidnapping and murder case where the applicant was in custody. The court allowed bail citing the identical bail status of a co-accused, absence of criminal history, and lack of eyewitnesses against the applicant.

What did the court decide?

Grant of bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount, subject to conditions.

Kasim @ Gama Vs State of U.P. — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 50

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11020 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Kasim @ Gama Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Vijay Prakash Chaturvedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri R.K. Singh, learned brief holder for the State and perused the record.

¶6

According to prosecution case, F.I.R. was lodged on 8.12.2018 against four accused persons, namely, Jamirullah, Mohd. Kasim @ Gama, Arman and Yar Mohammad alleging that Afsar Jahan, 16 years old, daughter of the complainant, kidnapped by the above four accused. Subsequently, her dead body was found on 8.12.2018. She received eight injuries. One is on head and due to head injury she died. One iron rod was recovered from the possession of Jamirullah used in this crime and he stated in his confessional statement before the Police that Arman caught hold of the deceased and Gama and Yar Mohammad had caught hold legs and Jamirullah had assaulted with iron rod, hence she died. There was illicit relation between the deceased and Jamirullah.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant is languishing in jail since 13.12.2018 (more than three months) having no criminal history. C co-accused namely Yar Mohammad has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 28.2.2019 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 8715 of 2019, since the role of the applicant is not distinguishable with the role of co-accused, therefore, the applicant is also entitled for bail. The applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. There is no motive or intention to kill the deceased. Motive is against Jamirullah. There is no recovery on the pointing out of the applicant. Iron rod was recovered from the possession of the co-accusedJamirullah. There is no eye witness account against the applicant. There is no independent witness against the applicant and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid fact as argued by learned counsel for the applicant and admitted that the applicant has no criminal history and also admitted that iron rod was recovered from the possession of Jamirullah and the case of present applicant is identical to co-accused Yar Mohammad who has been enlarged on bail.

¶9

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.

¶10

Let the applicant Kasim @ Gama involved in Case Crime No. 203 of 2018, under Section 363, 366, 302, 201 IPC, Police Station-Dhebarua, District-Siddharth Nagar 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:

¶11

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

¶12

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

¶13

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

¶14

4.The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.

¶15

5.The applicant 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.

¶16

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

¶17

Order Date :- 14.3.2019 A. Singh

Kasim @ Gama v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kasim @ Gama 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

Jyoti Vs State of U.P.

Pinki Devi Vs State of U.P.

Anju @ Anjum Vs State of U.P.

Santosh Vs State of U.P.

Ashif Vs State of U.P.

Santosh Vs State of U.P.