Allowed

Mohd. Shakib v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC22 Aug 2019BAIL/34068/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 34068 of 2019, the Court allowed the bail prayer of Mohd. Shakib charged under sections 392/411 IPC in a case where he was accused of false implication despite lack of criminal antecedents.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail by executing a personal bond and two reliable sureties subject to conditions of not tampering with evidence and cooperating in the trial.

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

¶1

Court No. - 79

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 34068 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Mohd. Shakib Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Maohammd Nadeem,Ashish Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ram Krishna Gautam,J.

¶5

By means of this application the applicant Mohd. Shakib has prayed to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 243 of 2019, under sections 392/411 IPC, Police Station Tirwa, District Kannauj.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA representing the State. Perused the record.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this very case crime number on the basis of alleged recovery of mobile phone, whereas no such recovery was ever made from him nor he was concerned this offence. The accused-applicant is of no criminal antecedent. There is no likelihood of applicant's fleeing from course of justice or tempering with evidence in case he is released on bail. Hence bail has been prayed for during trial. Applicant is in jail since 23.07.2019.

¶8

Learned AGA has vehemently opposed the bail application, but could not oppose the fact that accused-applicant is of no criminal antecedents.

¶9

Having heard learned counsel for both sides and perused the impugned order it is apparent that accused-applicant is of no criminal ascendents and recovery memo is of no independent public witness.

¶10

Under all above facts and circumstances, the nature of accusations, severity of the punishment in the case of conviction and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail with certain conditions.

¶11

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

¶12

Let the applicant, Mohd. Shakib , involved in above mentioned case crime number be released on bail on his executing a

¶13

personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions:

¶14

The applicant will not tamper with the evidence.

¶15

The applicant will not indulge in any criminal activity.

¶16

The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and co-operate in the trial.

¶17

The applicant will appear regularly on each and every date fixed by the trial court unless his personal appearance is exempted through counsel by the court concerned.

¶18

In the event of breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the court below will be at liberty to proceed to cancel his bail.

¶19

Order Date :- 22.8.2019 Vikram

Mohd. Shakib v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd. Shakib 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

Rajveer Vs State of U.P.

Smt. Rakhi Garg Vs State of U.P. and Another

Mamta @ Kalpana and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Aas Mohammad Vs State of U.P. and 2 Ors.

Veer Pratap Singh @ Veeru @ Bhim Singh Vs State of U.P.

Ram Naresh Chauhan Vs State of U.P.