Allowed

Sajid v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC16 Jan 2019BAIL/1917/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is a bail application decision where the court allowed the release of the applicant from custody. The court noted the applicant had no criminal history and was exonerated during investigation before being summoned under Section 319 Cr.P.C. Bail was granted subject to a bond and sureties.

What did the court decide?

Release of the applicant on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each, subject to specified conditions.

Sajid Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 50

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1917 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Sajid Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Chandra Prakash Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Chandra Prakash Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri D.N. Tiwari, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.

¶6

According to prosecution case, the F.I.R. was lodged against applicant alleging that on 12.2.2005, he shot fire at Avdhesh, he received one gun shot injury, resultantly died. During investigation, the name of applicant was found false; charge sheet has been submitted against Sanju and Kamlesh. Later on, applicant was summoned under Section 319 Cr.P.C.

¶7

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. There is general allegations against the applicant. Offences levelled against the applicant are not attracted in the present case. During investigation, applicant was exonerated, thereafter applicant was summoned under Section 319 Cr.P.C by the court concerned without giving opportunity of hearing and crossexamination. There is no legal evidence against the applicant. He is languishing in jail since 8.10.2018 (more than three months) 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 counsel for the complainant as well as 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 Sajid involved in Case Crime No. 73 of 2005 as well as S.S.T. No. 168A of 2011, under Section 396 IPC, Police Station Gursahaiganj, District Kannauj be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the

¶11

court concerned subject 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 :- 16.1.2019

¶19

A. Singh

Sajid v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sajid 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

Vijay Vs State of U.P.

Nanka Vs State of U.P.

Surendra Vs State of U.P.

Ramkaran Vs State of U.P.

Vicky Vs State of U.P.

Mausam Vs State of U.P.