Allowed

Abdul Rahman and Another v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC2 Apr 2019BAIL/12686/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court Court No. 23 granted bail to two applicants charged under the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities Act. The court held the applicants were entitled to release on furnishing a personal bond and sureties, imposing specific bail conditions.

What did the court decide?

Applicants released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties subject to conditions of no tampering with evidence/witnesses, cooperation with trial, and abstaining from criminal

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

¶1

Court No. - 23

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12686 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Abdul Rahman And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Bipin Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rajendra Kumar-IV,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Bipin Kumar, learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for State and perused the material available on record.

¶6

This bail application has been filed by the accused-applicant Abdul Rahman and Bholu alias Israil, who are involved in Case Crime No. 25 of 2019, under Section 3(1) Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station Saiyadraja, District Chandauli.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case for the purpose of harassment, therefore, false and fabricated prosecution story has been concocted by the police. He further submitted that in the gang chart one case is shown against the accused-applicants, in the said case, they have been released on bail by the court below on 15.2.2019. Applicants are in jail since 16.2.2019. It is further submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicants are enlarged on bail, they shall not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but did not dispute the factual submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicants.

¶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 applicants are entitled to be released on bail.

¶10

Accordingly, bail application is allowed .

¶11

Let applicants Abdul Rahman and Bholu @ Israil, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime on their furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions:-

¶12

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

¶13

The applicants 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, they 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 :- 2.4.2019 Manoj

Abdul Rahman and Another v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abdul Rahman and Another 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rakesh Alias Rakhi Vs State of U.P.

Rubal Alias Tinku Vs State of U.P.

Pramod Jaiswal Vs State of U.P.

Raju Alias Rajeev Vs State of U.P.

Anees Vs State of U.P.

Rinku Vs State of U.P.