Allowed

Guddu @ Najim v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC21 Oct 2019BAIL/37141/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is a bail application under Sections 392, 386, 504, and 411 IPC. Despite the applicant's prior conviction and the prosecution's opposition relying on Section 437 Cr.P.C., the court held that the section applies to Magistrates, not Sessions Courts. The court observed that it is a fit case for bail and granted release.

What did the court decide?

The applicant Guddu alias Najim is released on bail upon executing a personal bond with two sureties and complying with conditions regarding evidence tampering and witness harassment.

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

¶1

Court No. - 80

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 37141 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Guddu @ Najim Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Noor Mohammad Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Namit Kumar Sharma

¶4

Hon'ble Ajit Singh,J.

¶5

Supplementary affidavit filed today, is taken on record.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Namit Kumar Sharma, learned counsel for the complainant and the learned A.G.A.

¶7

The sister of the complainant is present before the Court, who has been identified by learned counsel for the applicant.

¶8

This is a bail application on behalf of the applicant Guddu alias Najim in connection with Case Crime No.279 of 2019, under Sections 392, 386, 504, 411 I.P.C., P.S. Sasni Gate, District Aligarh.

¶9

It was alleged in the first information report that the complainant was going to purchase gold ornaments for the marriage of his sister the accused had intercepted on the way and demanded Rs.50,000/from him and after pointing out countery made pistol on him had forcibly taken Rs.25,000/- from his pocket.

¶10

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 and his brother has also been falsely implicated. He submitted that the applicant had married the sister of the complainant and that is why he has been falsely implicated. He further submitted that the sister of the complainant is present before the Court. He submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 21.06.2019 and in case, he is released on bail he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial.

¶11

Learned counsel for the complainant and the learned A.G.A. have opposed the bail plea and submitted that the applicant was earlier convicted and granted bail by this Court. They further submitted that the provisions of Section 437 Cr.P.C. says that the accused, who is convicted should not be granted bail.

¶12

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.

¶13

The provisions of Section 437 Cr.P.C. are applicable to the Court of Magistrate and not applicable to the Court of Sessions and this Court.

¶14

Accordingly, the bail application stands allowed.

¶15

Let the applicant Guddi alias Najim involved in the aforesaid crime

¶16

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:

¶17

i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence. ii) The applicant shall not threaten or harass the prosecution witnesses;

¶18

iii) The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court; iv) The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which the applicant is accused, or suspected of the commission;

¶19

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.

¶20

Order Date :- 21.10.2019

¶21

R./

Guddu @ Najim v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Guddu @ Najim 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Om Prakash Vs State of U.P.

Shriniwas Vs State of U.P.

Aftab Vs State of U.P.

Sundar @ Surendra and Another Vs State of U.P.

Lallu Alias Santosh Vs State of U.P.

Rajendra Singh Chandel and Another Vs State of U.P.