Allowed

Mahboob v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC13 Feb 2019BAIL/2675/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted bail to the applicant Mahboob in a case under the Arms Act, allowing him to execute a personal bond with two sureties subject to various conditions regarding court attendance and cooperation with the trial process.

What did the court decide?

Applicant enlarged on bail with personal bond and two sureties (Rs. 2 lakhs each) subject to specific conditions of court attendance and non-interference with trial.

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

¶1

Court No. - 69

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2675 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Mahboob Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mohd. Naushad,Virendra Singh Tomar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

Supplementary affidavit has been filed today which is taken on record.

¶6

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

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. It is further submitted that one case has also been shown against the applicant in which the applicant has been granted bail by the court concerned The applicant has no concern with the alleged incident and no incriminating article has been recovered from the possession or on the pointing out of the applicant. 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 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 29.10.2018. The applicant has no criminal history to his credit.

¶8

Keeping in view the nature of submissions advanced, the applicant is entitled for bail.

¶9

Let, the applicant- Mahboob involved in Case Crime No.754 of 2018, under Section 5/25 Arms Act,Police Station- Jhinjhana, District- Shamli be enlarged on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties ( Rs. two lakhs each) (One should be of family member ) subject to the following conditions:-

¶10

(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.

¶11

(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. (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

¶12

Code.

¶13

(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.

¶14

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail.

¶15

Order Date :- 13.2.2019

¶16

aks

Mahboob v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mahboob 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

Aziz Nat Vs State of U.P.

Qayyum Vs State of U.P.

Dev Singh Vs State of U.P.

Vinod Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Kamil Vs State of U.P.

Ramveer Vs State of U.P.