Allowed

Chhotu @ Shamsad v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC4 Apr 2019BAIL/11497/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This application granted bail to the applicant accused under the Arms Act. The court observed that prima facie evidence of false implication exists. Bail was granted subject to conditions including attending trials and not tampering with evidence or engaging in unlawful activities.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail subject to personal bond, two sureties, and conditions regarding cooperation, non-tampering, and lawful behavior.

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

¶1

Court No. - 69

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11497 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Chhotu @ Shamsad Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mohd. Ayub Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Mohd. Ayub, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Sanjay Singh, learned AGA appearing for the State and perused the material brought on record.

¶6

It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. It is further submitted that false recovery has been shown, nothing has been recovered from the possession or on the pointing out of the applicant. It is further submitted that there is no evidence to connect the applicant with the present matter. There is no independent witness of the alleged offence/recovery. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused has also been touched upon at length. It is further submitted that criminal history of the applicant has been explained in paragraph 8 of the affidavit filed in support of bail application and there is also no possibility of applicant either fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses. Applicant is in jail since 24.9.2018, and undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty, if granted.

¶7

Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer.

¶8

Having heard the submissions of learned counsel of both sides, nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment , and larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh v. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 2 SCC 22 and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a case of bail.

¶9

Let applicant Chhotu @ Shamsad, be released on bail in Case Crime No. 166 of 2018, under Sections 3/5/25 of Arms Act, Police StationKhakhraru, district- Fatehpur, on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:--

¶10

(i) The applicant will co-operate with the trail and remain present personally on each and every date fixed after release.

¶11

(ii) The applicant will not tamper with the prosecution evidence and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.

¶12

(iii) The applicant will not indulge in any unlawful activities.

¶13

(iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever.

¶14

The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

¶15

Order Date :- 4.4.2019 ssm

Chhotu @ Shamsad v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chhotu @ Shamsad 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Azad Dom Vs State of U.P.

Kamal Vs State of U.P.

Gulfran @ Gulfan Vs State of U.P.

Santosh Gambhir Vs State of U.P.

Kanhai Lal Vs State of U.P.

Abid Vs State of U.P.