Mairaj v. State of U.P.
Case brief
What is this about?
The court granted bail to an applicant charged under Sections 392 and 411 IPC, accepting arguments of innocence and lack of tampering risk without deciding on the merits of the case.
What did the court decide?
Release on bail furnished by a personal bond and two reliable sureties with undertaking to court.
What the court decided
Court No. - 80
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 47484 of 2019
Applicant :- Mairaj Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Zafeer Ahmad Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajendra Kumar-IV,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for State and perused the material available on record.
Accused-applicant, involved in Case Crime No. 199 of 2019, under Sections 392 and 411 IPC, Police Station Bhagatpur, District Moradabad, applied for bail.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. Accused-applicant is not named in the FIR; nothing has been recovered from the possession of the applicant; recovery of motorcycle shown by the Police from the joint possession of the accused-applicants is false and fake; there is no public witness at the time of recovery. Applicant is in Jail since 12.09.2019. It is further submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant's fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses. In case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but did not dispute the factual submissions made by learned counsel for the accused-applicant.
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Whether to grant bail to the accused applicant who claims innocence and lack of flight risk.
Parties & counsel
- applicant
Mairaj
Coram
Rajendra Kumar
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Allahabad HC
- Decided on
- · November
- Registered
- Case no.
- BAIL/47484/2019
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court