Allowed

Mohd. Aquib v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC23 Apr 2019BAIL/16926/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed bail to Mohd. Aquib in a case under Section 3(1) of the U.P. Gangsters Act. The court held that the applicant, though alleged to be a gang member, made out a case for bail after noting he had been granted bail in other related cases and argued he would not flee or tamper with witnesses.

What did the court decide?

Applicant Mohd. Aquib shall be released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount, subject to conditions of not indulging in crime, tampering with evidence, or

Mohd. Aquib Vs State of U.P. — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 14

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 16926 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Mohd. Aquib Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rajesh Kumar Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ghandikota Sri Devi,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Rajesh Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶6

Applicant- Mohd. Aquib seeks bail in Case Crime No. 154 of 2018, under Section 3(1) U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act 1986, P.S. Gaura Badshahpur, District- Jaunpur.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. It is next contended that as per gang chart three cases alleged to have shown against the applicant, in which he has been granted bail, copy of the bail orders 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. Lastly, it is submitted that the applicant is in jail since 10.09.2018 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. The criminal history of the applicant has been explained in paragraph 5 of the affidavit.

¶8

Per contra, learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail to the applicant but admitted the fact that applicant has been granted bail in the aforementioned cases shown against him in the gang chart. and could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by learned counsel for the applicant.

¶9

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.

¶10

Let applicant Mohd. Aquib 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 :-

¶11

(i) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity.

¶12

(ii) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.

¶13

(iii) The applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses.

¶14

(iv) The applicant shall regularly appear on the dates fixed by the trial court unless his personal attendance is exempted by the trial court.

¶15

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.

¶16

Order Date :- 23.4.2019 V.S.Singh

Mohd. Aquib v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd. Aquib 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

Anil Gurjar Vs State of U.P.

Suhaib Vs State of U.P.

Aarif Vs State of U.P.

Mahendra Pasi @ Ramlakhan Vs State of U.P.

Farman Vs State of U.P.

Chhimman @ Mohd. Naseem Vs State of U.P.