Allowed

Aarif v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC17 Apr 2019BAIL/3492/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this bail application before Criminal Misc. BA No. 3492 of 2019, this Court released the applicant Aarif on bail in a crime under the U.P. Gangster Act. The Court recorded the condition of false implication and heavy pendency while balancing the severity of the offence.

What did the court decide?

The applicant Aarif was released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties, subject to standard conditions.

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

¶1

Court No. - 14 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3492 of 2019 Applicant :- Aarif Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rajesh Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶2

Hon'ble Ghandikota Sri Devi,J.

¶3

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶4

This bail application has been filed by the applicant Aarif seeking bail in Case Crime No. 742 of 2018, under Sections 2/3 U.P. Gangster Act and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Bulandshahr.

¶5

The contention as raised at the Bar by learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. 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 27.6.2018 and in the wake of heavy pendency of cases in the Court, there is no likelihood of any early conclusion of trial. It has been pointed out that the applicant is not having any criminal history.

¶6

Per contra, learned AGA for the State has opposed the prayer for bail .

¶7

Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail.

¶8

Let the applicant Aarif be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions:-

¶9

(i) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity.

¶10

(ii) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.

¶11

(iii) The applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses.

¶12

(iv) The applicant shall regularly appear on the dates fixed by the trial court unless his personal attendance is exempted by the trial court.

¶13

In case of default of any of the conditions enumerated above, it will be open to the opposite parties to approach the Court for cancellation of bail.

¶14

Order Date :- 17.4.2019/V.S.Singh

Aarif v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Aarif 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

Nand Kishor @ Nandu Vs State of U.P.

Amar Pal Vs State of U.P.

Billi @ Deepu Vs State of U.P.

Babbu Vs State of U.P.

Anil Gurjar Vs State of U.P.

Suhaib Vs State of U.P.