Allowed

Furkan v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC15 Feb 2019BAIL/5310/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application, the court held it a fit case for releasing the applicant Furkan on bail in a murder case where he was alleged to be falsely implicated. The court imposed standard conditions regarding cooperation and non-interference with evidence.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail with a personal bond and two sureties on conditions of cooperation and non-interference with prosecution evidence.

Furkan Vs State of U.P. — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 45

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5310 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Furkan Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sunil Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Sikandar Khan

¶4

Hon'ble Harsh Kumar,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Sunil Kumar, learned counsel for applicant, Sri Sikandar Khan, learned counsel for first informant, learned A.G.A. and perused the record.

¶6

Learned counsel for applicant contended that applicant is not named in F.I.R. and has been falsely implicated on the basis of subsequent developments; that as per averments made in F.I.R. dated 25.11.2018 co-accused Esub with two others came at the house of first informant by motorcycle and fetched his 22 years old son Salman, who did not return in night and in next morning at 7:30 a.m. his blood stained body was found within brikkiln of Mumtaj near village; that in his additional statement under section 161 Cr.P.C. first informant stated that his another son Farman and brother-in-law Shakeel informed him that deceased was seen by them with named accused Esub, applicant Furkan and his sister Soni near the brick kiln; that name of applicant has also surfaced in confessional statement of coaccused Esub; that applicant had no motive to cause death of Salman and did not participate in his elimination, with Esub; that confessional statement of co-accused is not binding on applicant; that case of applicant is distinguishable from Esub; that applicant may not be considered to be the person, who strangulated Salman to death; that applicant has no criminal history; that applicant undertakes that he will not misuse liberty of bail; that applicant is in custody since 11.12.2019.

¶7

Learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for first informant vehemently opposed prayer of bail.

¶8

Upon hearing learned counsel and perusal of record and considering the complicity of accused, severity of punishment as well as totality of facts and circumstances, at this stage without commenting on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail.

¶9

Let the applicant Furkan be released on bail in Case Crime No.1736 of 2018, under Sections 302, 201 and 120-B IPC, P.S.Kotwali Dehat, Reporting Police Chauki Nai Mandi, District Bulandshahar on furnishing a personal bond and two

¶10

sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:-

¶11

(i) The applicant will co-operate with the trial and remain present personally on each and every date fixed for framing of charge, recording of evidence as well as recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. or through counsel on other dates and in case of absence without sufficient cause, it will be deemed that he is abusing the liberty of bail enabling the court concerned to take necessary action in accordance with the provisions of Section 82 Cr.P.C. or Sections 174A and 229A I.P.C.

¶12

(ii) The applicant will not tamper with the prosecution evidence and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.

¶13

(iii) The applicant will not indulge in any unlawful activities.

¶14

The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

¶15

Order Date :- 15.2.2019 Tamang

Furkan v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Furkan 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

Km. Mahun Vs State of U.P.

Shafiq Vs State of U.P.

Satyendra Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Harendra Vs State of U.P.

Raju Baheliya Vs State of U.P.

Ghure Chauhan Vs State of U.P.