Allowed

Jalaluddin @ Nanhey Tailor v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC30 Jan 2019BAIL/4354/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this bail application, the court granted release to the applicant accused of causing death. Relying on the fact that co-accused with similar roles were already on bail and noting the sudden fight nature of the case, the court held it was a fit case for bail.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on furnishing personal bond and two sureties subject to standard bail conditions.

Jalaluddin @ Nanhey Tailor Vs State of U.P. — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 50

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4354 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Jalaluddin @ Nanhey Tailor Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Dr. Arun Srivastav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.

¶5

Heard Dr. Arun Srivastav, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri S.K. Tripathi, brief holder for the State and perused the record.

¶6

According to prosecution case, F.I.R. was lodged against five accused persons, namely, Jalaluddin, Sarfroj, Firoz, Sahgal and Sher Mohammad alleging that on 20.7.2018 they assaulted Ikbal, Kurban, Kajal and Meharunisha. Ikbal received one incised wound on head, resultantly died. All injuries of other injured are simple in nature.

¶7

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that coaccused namely Sahgal and Firoz have been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 13.12.2018 and 10.1.2019 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 47332 of 2018 and 1417 of 2019, since the role of the applicant is not distinguishable with the role of co-accused, therefore, the applicant is also entitled for bail. The applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. There is cross case in case crime no. 0478 of 2018. It was a case of sudden fight and incident has taken place in spur of moment, both sides have received injuries. At this stage, it is not possible to decide who are the aggressor. According to F.I.R. main role of causing head injury was assigned to co-accused Sarfaroj. There are general allegations against all accused except Sarfaroj. Offences levelled against the applicant are not attracted in the present case. There is no independent witness. He is languishing in jail since 14.8.2018 (more than five and half months) having no criminal history and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.

¶8

Learned counsel for the complainant as well as learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid fact as argued by learned counsel for the applicant and admitted that applicant has no criminal history and the case of present applicant is identical to coaccused Sahgal and Firoz who have been enlarged on bail.

¶9

Considering the submission of learned counsel for the parties, facts of the case, nature of allegation and period of custody, gravity of offence, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the opinion that it is a fit case for bail. Hence, the bail application is hereby

¶10

allowed.

¶11

Let the applicant Jalaluddin @ Nanhey Tailor involved in Case Crime No. 344 of 2018, under Sections 452, 323, 324, 304 IPC, P.S. Bisalpur, District Pilibhit be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:

¶12

The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶13

2.The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶14

3.The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶15

4.The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.

¶16

5.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 him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶17

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail.

¶18

Order Date :- 30.1.2019

¶19

A. Singh

Jalaluddin @ Nanhey Tailor v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jalaluddin @ Nanhey Tailor 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

Samajhdar Vs State of U.P.

Taaj Mohammad Vs State of U.P.

Sonu Vs State of U.P.

Neeraj Singh Vs State of U.P.

Karelal @ Kariya Vs State of U.P.

Dharmendra Kumar @ Amar Vs State of U.P.