Allowed

Ibban Khan v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC8 Jan 2019BAIL/25167/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court allowed bail to Ibban Khan under Section 437 Cr.P.C., directing release on personal bond with two sureties of Rs. three lakhs subject to specific conditions regarding court attendance and prohibition of adjournments.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties of Rs. three lakhs subject to specified conditions regarding court attendance.

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

¶1

Court No. - 69

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 25167 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Ibban Khan Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ashutosh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Ashutosh, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Abhinav Prasad,learned A.G.A. appearing for the State.

¶6

This is the second bail application moved on behalf of the applicant. The first bail application moved on behalf of the applicant was rejected vide order dated 10.1.2017 by Hon'ble Pratyush Kumar, J (since retired).

¶7

It is contended by the learned counsel for the applicant while rejecting the first bail application of the applicant vide order dated 10.1.2017 the court below was directed to expedite the trial of the case and try to conclude the trial expeditiously preferably within a period of one year, but as on date only prosecution witnesses have been examined by the trial Court.

¶8

It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. It is further contended that the applicant is said to have been arrested for adulterating illicit liquor with urea fertilizer thereby making it dangerous for human consumption. Learned counsel submits that the applicant is innocent. He has been falsely implicated. No report from State Forensic Science Laboratory has been received and nothing incriminating has been recovered from the possession of the applicant. No independent person has been made witness to the recovery. Applicant is a family man. He is not likely to abscond. Co-accused Raja has been granted bail. .Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused has also been touched upon at length. It has been assured on behalf of the

¶9

applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required. It has also been submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 20.7.2016. It has been pointed out that the applicant has no criminal history.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail.

¶11

Having heard the submissions of learned counsel of both sides, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh v. State of U.P. and another , reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 and without expressing any view on the merit of the case, I find it to be a case of bail.

¶12

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case let the applicant Ibban Khan involved in Case Crime No.340 of 2016, under Section 60 of the Excise Act and Section 272 I.P.C., Police Station Ganj, District Rampur be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties (of Rs. three lakhs) (one should be of family member) with the following conditions.

¶13

(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶14

(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶15

(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶16

(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶17

Order Date :- 8.1.2019 Dev/-

Ibban Khan v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ibban Khan 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

Shiva Parashar Vs State of U.P.

Laxman Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Somveer Vs State of U.P.

Bhola @ Layak Singh Vs State of U.P.

Sanju Vs State of U.P.

Sanjay Yadav Vs State of U.P.