Allowed

Chhotu @ Shamsad v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC4 Apr 2019BAIL/11508/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This bail application by Chhotu @ Shamsad in a case under Section 3/5/25 of the Arms Act was allowed. The High Court granted bail by furnishing a personal bond and sureties, relying on the grant of bail to co-accused and the applicant's lack of criminal history, without expressing an opinion on the merits of the case.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail subject to personal bond and two sureties under specified conditions.

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

¶1

Court No. - 69

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11508 of 2019 Applicant :- Chhotu @ Shamsad Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mohd. Ayub Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶3

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.

¶4

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

¶5

It is contended that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that co-accused Ilyas, and Abrar having similar role have been granted bail by this Court on 14.11.2018 and 12.12.2018, in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 37267 and 47466 of 2018, a copy of said order has been annexed as Annexure-3 to the affidavit filed in support of bail application and the case of the applicant stands on identical footing, hence the applicant is also entitled for bail on the ground of parity. The applicant has no criminal history. The applicant is in jail since 24.9.2018.

¶6

Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer without disputing the fact that co-accused has been granted bail.

¶7

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, I find it to be a case of bail.

¶8

Let applicant- Chhotu @ Shamsad, be released on bail in Case Crime No. 118 of 2018, under Sections 3/5/25 of Arms Act, Police StationKhakhararu, District- Fatehpur, on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:-

¶9

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

¶10

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

¶11

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

¶12

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

¶13

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.

¶14

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.