Allowed

Saleem v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC21 Jan 2019BAIL/2431/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court allowed a bail application under Sections 302, 307, 504, and 506 IPC for an applicant named Saleem. The court relied on the fact that a co-accused with an identical role had already been granted bail and acknowledged the applicant's lack of criminal history and no evidence yet against him.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail with personal bond and two sureties on standard conditions.

Saleem Vs State of U.P. — Cheque Dishonour | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 50

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2431 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Saleem Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rajesh Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Rajesh Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant, Smt. Ladlee Pandey, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.

¶6

According to prosecution case, F.I.R. was lodged against Vipin Nagar @ Vikky and three unknown persons alleging that on 2.12.2016 they shot fire at Faruk Beg, Vishal and Akash. Vishal received injuries, resultantly died. Injuries received by the injured are not dangerous to life. During investigation, the name of Saleem and Nirmal was surfaced.

¶7

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that coaccused namely Nirmal has been already granted bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 26.10.2018 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 40219 of 2018, since the role of the applicant is not distinguishable with the role of co-accused, therefore, the applicant is also entitled for bail. Applicant was not named in the F.I.R. There is general allegation against the applicant. There is no independent witness and no legal evidence against the applicant. The applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. Offences levelled against the applicant are not attracted in the present case. He is languishing in jail since 15.10.2018 (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 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 and the case of present applicant is identical to coaccused Nirmal who has been enlarged on bail.

¶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 applicant Saleem involved in Case Crime No. 1423 of 2016, under Sections 302, 307, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station

¶11

Loni, District Ghaziabad 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 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 :- 21.1.2019 A. Singh

Saleem v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Saleem 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

Ramanand Vs State of U.P.

Nanhe Pal Vs State of U.P.

Mukesh Vs State of U.P.

Sajid Vs State of U.P.

Nageshwar Pal @ Bhole Pal Vs State of U.P.

Kamran Vs State of U.P.