Allowed

Ibrahim v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC28 Mar 2019BAIL/12646/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Single Judge granted bail to the applicant in a cow slaughter case, relying on Dataram Singh. Conditions included avoiding adjournments and personal presence for evidence, charge framing, and §313 proceedings, with criminal sanctions for breaches.

What did the court decide?

Accused Ibrahim released on bail by executing personal bond and two sureties of Rs. 1.00 lac each subject to specified conditions of appearance and compliance.

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

¶1

Court No. - 69

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12646 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Ibrahim Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Chandra Dutt Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Chandra Dutt, learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State and also perused the record.

¶6

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive by the police in order to show their good work and he has committed no offence. False recovery of 5-6 skins alongwith some incriminating articles of prohibited animal was shown by the police from the possession of the applicant. In fact, nothing has been recovered from his possession.There was no independent witness of the alleged 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 has been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required. It has also been submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 11.1.2019. The applicant has no other reported criminal antecedent.Other co-accused namely Pallu Singh and Zafir have already been released on bail by this Court copies of bail orders are enclosed as Annexures 4 & 5 on pages 27 to 30 to the bail application.

¶7

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail.

¶8

Considering the nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tempering of the witnesses and prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge and reformative theory of punishment, and also considering the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh v. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶9

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and keeping in view the nature of submissions advanced, let the applicant- Ibrahim involved in Case Crime No.8 of 2019, under Sections 3/5/8 Cow Slaughter Act ,Police Station- Kotwali Kalpi, District Jalaun be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties (Rs. 1.00 lac each)(One should be of family member) to the satisfaction of court concerned subject to the following conditions:-

¶10

(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for

¶11

the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶12

(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶13

(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶14

(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶15

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

¶16

Order Date :- 28.3.2019 IA

Ibrahim v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ibrahim 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

Navin Nishchal Vs State of U.P.

Krishna Kumar Singh Vs Narcotc Control Bureau Lucknow

Wazid Vs State of U.P.

Faisal Vs State of U.P.

Meharban @ Rabbal Vs State of U.P.

Pramod Kumar Vs State of U.P.