Allowed

Hidayatullah v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC24 Jan 2019BAIL/3229/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, and 409 IPC, the Single Judge considered the applicant's claim of innocence and lack of misappropriation. Finding prima facie satisfaction was lacking for strict custody release, the court allowed bail upon bond and sureties.

What did the court decide?

The applicant Hidayatullah is released on bail by executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court.

Hidayatullah Vs State of U.P. — Corruption | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 44

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3229 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Hidayatullah Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mohd. Shoeb Khan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Arvind Kumar Mishra-I,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State of U.P and perused the material available on record.

¶6

Contention raised on behalf of the applicant has been confined to the extent that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. The applicant happens to be clerk only and the entire crime has been committed by Subodh Mishra engaged in the department who alone is the main culprit and he is stated to have received cheque. The pay roll also contains his signature. In fact, no wrongful gain has been made by the applicant and the alleged money was never misappropriated as such. In case the applicant is admitted to bail, there is no possibility of absconding or misusing the liberty of bail. The applicant does not bear any criminal history and is languishing in jail since 07.09.2018.

¶7

Learned A.G.A. has opposed prayer for bail. However, learned A.G.A. has not disputed the aforesaid facts.

¶8

Without entering into merit of the case but considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tampering with witness or apprehension of threat to the complainant and prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail. Accordingly, bail application is allowed.

¶9

Let the applicant Hidayatullah involved in Case Crime No.423 of 2018, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 409 I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali Padrauna, District Kushinagar be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

¶10

Order Date :- 24.1.2019 rkg

Hidayatullah v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hidayatullah 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

Shekhar Mishra Vs State of U.P.

Kayyum Ali Vs State of U.P.

Prashant Kumar Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Arvendra Rajak @ Basu Vs State of U.P.

Banty Chaturvedi Vs State of U.P.

Aakash Vs State of U.P.