Farman v. State of U.P.
Case brief
What is this about?
Convicted in cheque forgery and cheating, applicant Farman sought bail. Bench allowed bail citing parity with co-accused and non-gravity of offences, imposing standard bail conditions. Order dated 21.8.2019.
What did the court decide?
Application allowed; applicant released on personal bond with two sureties each, subject to non-impeding investigation and attendance conditions.
What the court decided
Court No. - 80
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 33808 of 2019
Applicant :- Farman Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Zafar Abbas Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ajit Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and the learned A.G.A.
This is a bail application on behalf of the applicant Farman in connection with Case Crime No.0205 of 2019, under Sections 411, 413, 414, 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C., P.S. Hayat Nagar, District Sambhal.
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 the alleged recovery shown from the possession of the applicant is totally fake and false. He submitted that there is no public witness of the alleged recovery. He submitted that the co-accused Chand Babu has been admitted to the concession of bail by this Court by order dated 19.08.2019 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.32398 of 2019 and the role assigned to the applicant is similar to the role of the other co-accused, who have already been enlarged on bail. He claims parity. He submitted that all the offences are triable by the court of Magistrate. He submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 28.06.2019 and in case, he is released on bail he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial.
Issues for consideration
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to bail in a case involving Sections 411, 413, 414, 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC considering parity with co-accused?
Whether the alleged recovery shown is genuine or fake without public witness?
Whether the applicant has fled or tampered with evidence?
Parties & counsel
- applicant
Farman
- respondent
State Of U.P.
Coram
Ajit Singh
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Allahabad HC
- Decided on
- · August
- Registered
- Case no.
- BAIL/33808/2019
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court