In a bail application under the UP Gangsters Act, the court held that despite the serious nature of the offense involving kidnapping and extortion, the applicant's lack of criminal history and the prima facie weak FIR allegations made out a case for bail.
Released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 14
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 15732 of 2019
Applicant :- Mufeed Ahmad Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mohammad Daud,Moeez Uddin Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ghandikota Sri Devi,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
Applicant-Mufeed Ahmad seeks bail in Case Crime No. 0009 of 2018, under Sections 2 and 3 of Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, P.S. Saraon, District- Prayagraj.
It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive; that the FIR has been lodged by Surendra Nath S.H.O., Police Station Saraon, District Prayagraj against Lallu @ Parvez, Zaid and Mufeed Ahmad (applicant) with the allegations that all the accused persons formed a gang to commit the offences of kidnapping or abduction in order to extort the ransom. It is next contended that as per gang chart as mentioned in paragraph 5 of the affidavit, one case alleged to have shown against the applicant, in which he has been granted bail, copy of the bail order annexed as Annexure 3 to this affidavit. It is next contended that there is also no possibility of his either fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses; that the averments made in the FIR are absolutely false, baseless and highly improbable; lastly, it is submitted that the applicant has no criminal history; applicant is in jail since 03.01.2019 and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial by all means.
Per contra, learned AGA has vehementally opposed the prayer for bail.
Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail.
Let applicant Mufeed Ahmad be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond
and two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions :-
(i) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity. (ii) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.
(iii) The applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses.
(iv) The applicant shall regularly appear on the dates fixed by the trial court unless his personal attendance is exempted by the trial court.
In case of default of any of the conditions enumerated above, it will be open to the opposite parties to approach the Court for cancellation of bail.
Order Date :- 1.5.2019 T.S.
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant is eligible for bail under the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities Act.
Whether the allegations in the FIR make the arrest prima facie illegal.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Mufeed Ahmad
Ghandikota Sri Devi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
