Allowed

Nizamuddin v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC19 Jun 2019BAIL/24789/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the bail application of the applicant in a Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act case. The court found it to be a fit case for bail considering the facts and severity of the offence, granting release on personal bond and sureties with specific conditions.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties with conditions to not tamper with evidence or threaten witnesses.

Nizamuddin Vs State of U.P. — Narcotics (NDPS) | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 48

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 24789 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Nizamuddin Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ajay Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ajit Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶6

This is a bail application on behalf of the applicant Nizamuddin in connection with Case Crime No.220/2019, under Sections 3/5-A/8 Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act , P.S. Gajraula, District Amroha.

¶7

Learned counsel submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. It is further submitted that the alleged recovery of beef is false; that the offence is triable by the Court of Magistrate; that the applicant is in jail since 2.5.2019.

¶8

Learned AGA has opposed the bail application.

¶9

Considering the overall facts and circumstances, the nature of allegations, the gravity of offence, the severity of the punishment, the evidence appearing against the accused but without expressing any opinion on merits, this Court finds it to be a fit case for bail.

¶10

Accordingly, the bail application stands allowed.

¶11

Let the applicant Nizamuddin involved in Case Crime No.220/2019, under Sections 3/5-A/8 Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act, P.S. Gajraula, District Amroha be released

¶12

on bail on executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:

¶13

i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.

¶14

ii) The applicant shall not threaten or harass the prosecution witnesses.

¶15

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

¶16

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

¶17

v) 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 such person from disclosing facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶18

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

¶19

Order Date :- 19.6.2019 Nadeem Ahmad

Nizamuddin v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nizamuddin 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ram Surat Yadav Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rajesh Bharti Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shri Prakash @ Prem and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

M/S.Sri Ram Corporation Vs State of U.P. and Another

Akhilesh Kumar Vs State of U.P.and Another

Gaurav @ Prabal Singh and 2 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and Another