Allowed

Kalu @ Alam v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC19 Aug 2019BAIL/30311/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 30311 of 2019, the Single Judge allowed the bail plea of the applicant Kalu @ Alam in a case involving multiple IPC offenses. The applicant was released on personal bond and two sureties subject to standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Bail allowed. Applicant to execute personal bond and furnish two sureties. Standard conditions imposed regarding evidence, witnesses, and appearance.

Kalu @ Alam Vs State of U.P. — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 80

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 30311 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Kalu @ Alam Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Dhiraj Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ajit Singh,J.

¶5

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

¶6

This is a bail application on behalf of the applicant Kalu @ Alam in connection with Case Crime No.461 of 2019, under Sections 34, 147, 148, 149, 332, 336, 337, 353, 395, 427, 504 I.P.C. & 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act, P.S. Deoband, District Saharanpur.

¶7

The submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is quite innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case with the ulterior motive. He submitted that no incriminating article was recovered from the possession of the applicant or on his pointing out. He further submitted that no identification parade was conducted by the police to ascertain the real culprits. He submitted that all the offences are triable by the court of Magistrate. He submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 20.06.2019 and in case, he is released on bail he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail plea.

¶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 Kalu @ Alam involved in the aforesaid crime be released 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:

¶12

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

¶13

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

¶14

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

¶15

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

¶16

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.

¶17

Order Date :- 19.8.2019

¶18

R./

Kalu @ Alam v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kalu @ Alam 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

Rashid Vs State of U.P.

Syed Mujahir Askari Vs State of U.P.

Soyab Vs State of U.P.

Krishna Vs State of U.P.

Nityanand Mishra Vs State of U.P.

Deepak Batham Vs State of U.P.