This bail application allowed for Sahab Ansari in a theft case under IPC Sections 395, 412. The court noted he was falsely implicated, no evidence was recovered from him, and co-accused were on bail, finding him a fit case for bail.
The applicant was released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 80
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 26688 of 2019
Applicant :- Sahab Ansari Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Syed Mohd. Khalid Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ajit Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.
This is a bail application on behalf of the applicant in connection with Case Crime No.650 of 2018, under Sections 395, 412 IPC, P.S. Baradari, District Bareilly.
The contention of the learned counsel for the applicant is that he has been falsely implicated in the present case and he has not named in the present FIR. It is further submitted that nothing incriminating has been recovered from the possession of the present applicant. It is further submitted that there is no public witness of the alleged recovery. Offence is triable by the Magistrate. It is further submitted that the co-accused Imran, Javed, Aslam @ Akku and Asif having similar role have already been enlarged on bail vide orders dated 14.11.2018, 15.11.2018, 14.3.2019, 7.5.2019 passed by the another Bench of this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos.43215 of 2018, 43318 of 2018, 11066 of 2019 and 19172 of 2019. Hence, the present applicant is also entitled to be enlarged on bail on the ground of parity. Lastly he submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 15.6.2018 and in case, he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial.
Learned AGA has opposed the bail plea. However, learned A.G.A. does not dispute the factum of parity.
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.
Accordingly, the bail application stands allowed .
Let the applicant Sahab Ansari be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions;-
i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.
ii) The applicant shall not threaten or harass the prosecution witnesses.
iii) The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court.
iv) The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which the applicant is accused, or suspected of the commission.
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.
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.
Order Date :- 5.7.2019 Mini
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant, falsely implicated in a theft case where co-accused on bail, is entitled to bail on grounds of parity and lack of incriminating evidence?
Whether the bail plea should be allowed considering the gravity of the offence and the nature of allegations?
Sahab Ansari
Ajit Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
