Allowed

Umar v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC27 Sept 2019BAIL/40156/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment grants bail to the applicant Umar in a theft case involving Sections 398 and 401 IPC. The court found the case fit for bail considering the nature of allegations and evidence, allowing release on personal bond and sureties subject to specific conditions.

What did the court decide?

Release of the applicant on bail on executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties, subject to conditions against tampering, threatening witnesses, and committing new offences.

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

¶1

Court No. - 80

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 40156 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Umar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Garun Pal Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ajit Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and the learned A.G.A.

¶6

This is a bail application on behalf of the applicant Umar in connection with Case Crime No.197 of 2019, under Sections 398, 401 I.P.C., P.S. Barsana, District Mathura.

¶7

As per allegation in the first information report that the applicant along with other co-accused was conspiring to commit theft then the police arrested the applicant along with other co-accused and another co-accused ran away.

¶8

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 joint possession is totally fake and false. He submitted that there is no public witness of the alleged recovery. He submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 29.07.2019 and in case, he is released on bail he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail plea.

¶10

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.

¶11

Accordingly, the bail application stands allowed.

¶12

Let the applicant Umar involved in the aforesaid crime 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:

¶13

i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.

¶14

ii) The applicant shall not threaten or harass the prosecution witnesses;

¶15

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;

¶16

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.

¶17

Order Date :- 27.9.2019R./

Umar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Umar 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

Baliram Gupta Vs State of U.P.

Ajay Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Rinku Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Girja Shankar Rai Vs State of U.P.

Suresh Singh Banaphar Vs State of U.P.

Pooja Vs State of U.P.