Allowed

Irfan @ Susa v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC14 Nov 2019BAIL/47616/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court allowed the bail application of Irfan @ Susa accused under Sections 380 and 411 IPC, citing parity with a co-accused. The applicant was directed to furnish a personal bond, two sureties, and satisfy the court on specific conditions regarding trial conduct.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on furnishing personal bond, two sureties, and filing undertakings regarding cooperation and non-tampering.

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

¶1

Court No. - 80

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 47616 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Irfan @ Susa Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Vishal Agarwal Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rajendra Kumar-IV,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for State and perused the material available on record.

¶6

Accused-applicant, involved in Case Crime No. 36 of 2018, under Sections 380 and 411 IPC, Police Station Hathras Gate, District Hathras, applied for bail.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case; applicant is not named in the FIR; his name came into light during investigation in the statement of co-accused; alleged recovery of Peetal Dhatu, two silver coins and Rs.1500/- shown by Police are false and fake. Accused-applicant is languishing in Jail since 21.01.2018 having no criminal history. 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. He further pointed out that co-accused Babloo@Firoz has already been granted bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 20.03.2018 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 10435 of 2018 and the case of the applicant stands of identical footing, hence the applicant is also entitled for bail on the ground of parity

¶8

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but did not dispute the factual submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶9

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, rival contention of learned counsel for the parties, detention of applicant in jail, severity of punishment in case of conviction and without commenting upon the merit of the case, applicant deserves bail.

¶10

Accordingly, bail application is allowed.

¶11

Let applicant-Irfan @ Susa be released on bail in the aforesaid

¶12

case crime on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties and filing an undertaking to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions:-

¶13

The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.

¶14

The applicant shall co-operate with the trial and shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for charge, evidence when the witnesses are present in the court, statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and argument.

¶15

During trial, applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activities or case.

¶16

In breach of any condition enumerated above, Trial Court shall be at liberty to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.

¶17

Order Date :- 14.11.2019 Akram

Irfan @ Susa v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Irfan @ Susa 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

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Man Singh Vs State of U.P.

Deepak Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Santosh Soni Vs State of U.P.

Ramu Sharma Vs State of U.P.

Roopram Vs State of U.P.

Mahendra Alias Lakhram Vs State of U.P.