Allowed

Firasat Ali and Another v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC4 Apr 2019BAIL/13979/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court granted bail to two appellants in a murder case. Relying on the parity principle, the court allowed the bail application since a co-accused with an indistinguishable role had already been released by the same court. The court imposed standard bail conditions including the furnishing of a personal bond and two sureties each.

What did the court decide?

Applicants released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each, subject to standard conditions.

Firasat Ali and Another Vs State of U.P. — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 50

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 13979 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Firasat Ali And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Pradeep Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.

¶5

Vakalatnama filed today by Sri Zafeer Ahmad, Advocate on behalf of complainant is taken on record.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned counsel for the complainant as well as learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.

¶7

According to prosecution case, F.I.R. was lodged against six accused persons, namely Insar Ali, Arshad Ali, Intjar Ali, Murshad Ali, Firast Ali and Ishrat Ali alleging that on 28.9.2018 they assaulted Ishrat Ali @ Bablu with danda and sharp-edged weapon, he received eleven injuries, resultantly died.

¶8

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that co-accused namely Arshad Ali has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 27.3.2019 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 12156 of 2019, since the role of the applicants are not distinguishable with the role of coaccused, therefore, the applicants are also entitled for bail on the ground of parity. The applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case. There are general allegations against all accused persons. It is not clear from the prosecution case who is the author of that injuries due do which he died. Nothing was recovered from the possession of applicants. There is no independent witness and no legal evidence against the applicants. Offences levelled against the applicants are not attracted in the present case. They are languishing in jail since 29.9.2018 (more than six months) having no criminal history and in case they are released on bail, they will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.

¶9

Learned counsel for the complainant opposed the prayer for bail.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid fact as argued by learned counsel for the applicants and admitted that applicants have no criminal history and the case of present applicants is identical to co-accused Arshad Ali who has been enlarged on bail.

¶11

Considering the submission of learned counsel for the

¶12

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.

¶13

Let applicants Firasat Ali and Insar Ali involved in Case Crime No. 612 of 2018, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 324, 325, 302, 307 IPC, Police Station Tanda, District Rampur 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:

¶14

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

¶15

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

¶16

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

¶17

4.The applicants shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which they are accused, or suspected, of the commission of which they are suspected.

¶18

5.The applicants 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 them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶19

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

¶20

Order Date :- 4.4.2019 A. Singh

Firasat Ali and Another v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Firasat Ali 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ajay Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Ashish @ Shobhi Mishra Vs State of U.P.

Chandra Prakash @ Chandu Vs State of U.P.

Amit Vs State of U.P.

Ravindra Vs State of U.P.

Nand Kishor Yadav Vs State of U.P.