Allowed

Hasan Kuraishi v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC8 May 2019BAIL/20400/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court granted bail in a criminal case involving murder and culpable homicide. It held that prima facie a case for bail was made out despite the lack of direct evidence against the applicant, noting the absence of his name in the FIR and lack of vehicle ownership or driver connection.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail by executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties to specific conditions regarding appearance and witness conduct.

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

¶1

Court No. - 51

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 20400 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Hasan Kuraishi Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Manish Joshi,Noor Mohammad Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Vipin Sinha,J.

¶5

Heard Mr. Noor Mohammad, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. V.K. Pandey, learned AGA for the State.

¶6

Applicant has moved the present bail application seeking bail in Case Crime No. 596 of 2017 u/s 364, 302, 201 IPC PS Mansoorpur District Muzaffarnagar.

¶7

Contention of the learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant was not named in the FIR. There is no evidence on record which may show the participation of the applicant in the crime or which may connect him with the crime. Contention is that the truck in which dead body was found does not belong to the present applicant. The applicant is neither the owner nor the driver or the conductor of the vehicle in question. Contention is that at most it can be said that there is only evidence of last seen against the applicant. It is a case of circumstantial evidence where important links are missing. Contention is that applicant is in jail since 9.3.2018 and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty.

¶8

Learned AGA has opposed the bail application of the applicant.

¶9

In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, at this stage, prima facie, a case for bail has been made out. However, the said prima facie view of this Court will not in any manner adversely affect the case of the prosecution.

¶10

The prayer for bail is granted. The application is allowed.

¶11

Let the applicant Hasan Kuraishi involved in the aforesaid case crime number be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:

¶12

i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence. ii) The applicant shall not threaten or harass the prosecution witnesses.

¶13

iii) The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court.

¶14

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

¶15

v) The applicant shall not directly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to

¶16

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

¶17

In case of default of any of the conditions enumerated above, the learned counsel for the complainant is free to move an application for cancellation of bail before this Court.

¶18

However, it is directed that the aforesaid case crime number pending before the concerned court below be decided expeditiously, as early as possible in accordance with Section 309 Cr.P.C. and in view of principle as has been laid down in the recent judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Vinod Kumar v. State of Punjab reported in 2015 (3) SCC 220 and Hussain and Another v. Union of India; 2017 (5) SCC 702, if there is no legal impediment.

¶19

It is made clear that in case the witnesses are not appearing, the concerned court is directed to initiate necessary coercive measure for ensuring their presence.

¶20

Order Date :- 8.5.2019 SP

Hasan Kuraishi v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hasan Kuraishi 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

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Suneeta @ Barfi Vs State of U.P.

Devendra Alias Nanhu Vs State of U.P.

Manpal Vs State of U.P.

Pushpendra Vs State of U.P.

Obaida Vs State of U.P.

Pappu Vs State of U.P.