Allowed

Aourangjeb v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC7 May 2019BAIL/15378/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In CM Bail Application No. 15378 of 2019, the court examined the bail plea of Aourangjeb in a case involving Sections 392 and 411 IPC and Arms Act offences. Finding no independent public witness for the alleged recovery, the court allowed bail subject to standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail by executing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount subject to four conditions regarding evidence, criminal activity, witnesses, and court appeara

Aourangjeb Vs State of U.P. — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 79

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 15378 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Aourangjeb Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Pavan Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ram Krishna Gautam,J.

¶5

By means of this application the applicant Aourangjeb has prayed to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 1033 of 2018, u/s 392, 411 I.P.C., P.S. Nai Mandi, District Muzaffar Nagar.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA representing the State. Perused the record.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this very case crime number, which was registered against unknown person. Present accused applicant has been arrested in a case under Section 3/25 Arms Act, wherein he was implicated in present case crime number. Whereas there is no independent public witness of alleged recovery. Criminal history has been duly explained in affidavit filed in support of bail application. He is on bail in all those cases and rest are planted on the date of arrest. Bail has been prayed for.

¶8

Learned AGA has vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground of criminal history.

¶9

Perusal of FIR reveals that it was got lodged against unknown miscreants. Subsequently, accused was arrested for offence under Arms act, in which he has been implicated in present case on the basis of alleged recovery, of which there is no independent public witness. Under all above facts and circumstances, the nature of accusations, severity of the punishment in the case of conviction and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail with certain conditions.

¶10

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

¶11

Let the applicant, Aourangjeb, involved in above mentioned case crime number be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount

¶12

to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions:

¶13

The applicant will not tamper with the evidence.

¶14

The applicant will not indulge in any criminal activity.

¶15

The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and co-operate in the trial.

¶16

The applicant will appear regularly on each and every date fixed by the trial court unless his personal appearance is exempted through counsel by the court concerned.

¶17

In the event of breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the court below will be at liberty to proceed to cancel his bail.

¶18

Order Date :- 7.5.2019 Kamarjahan

Aourangjeb v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Aourangjeb 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

Anuj Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Pawan Kumar Sharma Vs State of U.P.

Raju Lal Vs State of U.P.

Akash Vs State of U.P.

Anuj Vs State of U.P.

Vinay Kumar Vs State of U.P.