Allowed

Jaan Mohammad v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC26 Apr 2019BAIL/17675/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed a bail application filed by Jaan Mohammad, father-in-law of the deceased woman in a dowry death and affray case. The applicant was released on personal bond and sureties subject to standard conditions regarding tampering with evidence and attending court.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

Jaan Mohammad Vs State of U.P. — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 77

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 17675 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Jaan Mohammad Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Lavkush Kumar Bhatt Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri S.K. Tripathi, learned brief holder for the State and perused the record.

¶6

According to prosecution case, F.I.R. was lodged by the informant against five accused persons namely, Nasim, Jan Mohammad, Rukhsana, Khurshid and Tavssum alleging that the marriage of deceased Anjuma Begam was solemnized with Nasim on 30. 10.2018, they tortured her and and on 1.4.2019 they killed her. According to postmortem report, cause of death was found asphyxia due to antemortem hanging.

¶7

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is the father-in-law of deceased. The applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. There is general allegations against the applicant. There is no independent witness and no legal evidence against the applicant. Offences levelled against the applicant are not attracted in the present matter. He has no concern with the demand of dowry and he is not beneficiary of the same. Applicant has no concern with deceased and her husband. He is living separately. Deceased has committed suicide herself. He is languishing in jail since 4.4.2019 having no criminal history and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid fact as argued by learned counsel for the applicant and admitted that applicant has no criminal history.

¶9

Considering the submission of learned counsel for the 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.

¶10

Let the applicant Jaan Mohammad involved in Case Crime No. 70 of 2019, under Sections 147, 306 IPC, P.S. Nawabganj, District Farrukhabad 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

¶11

to following conditions:

¶12

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

¶13

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

¶14

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

¶15

4.The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.

¶16

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

¶17

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

¶18

Order Date :- 26.4.2019

¶19

A. Singh

Jaan Mohammad v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jaan Mohammad 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

Umesh @ Kajariya Vs State of U.P. and Another

Suraj Pal Vs State of U.P.

Smt. Sudha @ Rubi Vs State of U.P.

Amit Vs State of U.P.

Urmila Pandey Vs State of U.P. and Another

Mumtaz Vs State of U.P.