Allowed

Shahrookh v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC20 Feb 2019BAIL/6882/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal bail application under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302 IPC, the single judge held that despite severity of punishment, considering complicity of accused, grant of bail to co-accused, and applicant's lack of motive to cause death, it is a fit case for bail at this stage.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on personal bond and two sureties subject to conditions of appearance, non-tampering, and no unlawful activities.

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

¶1

Court No. - 45

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6882 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Shahrookh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Kapil Tyagi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Harsh Kumar,J.

¶5

Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for applicant today in Court, is taken on record.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for applicant, learned A.G.A. and perused the record.

¶7

Learned counsel for applicant contended that applicant has been falsely implicated; that as per averments made in F.I.R. lodged by Intezar, his nephew Rizwan was going to bring some articles when applicant and 10 others were committing firing and on his way, Abbas fired at head of Rizwan, who succumbed to injuries; that no specific role has been assigned to applicant; that applicant has explained his criminal history in paras 3 & 4 of supplementary affidavit; that co-accused Rahess, Arif, Khalid, Shafiq and Naseem have been granted bail by this Court vide orders dated 5.2.2019, 6.2.2019, 14.2.2019 & 13.2.2019 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos.4874 of 2019, 5164 of 2019, 6466 of 2019, 5330 of 2019 and 5711 of 2019 respectively, copies collectively filed at S.A.-3; that case of applicant is distinguishable from Abbas; that applicant had no motive to cause death of deceased; that applicant undertakes that he will not misuse liberty of bail; that applicant is in custody since 28.10.2018.

¶8

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

¶9

Upon hearing learned counsel and perusal of record and considering the complicity of accused, severity of punishment, grant of bail to co-accused 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.

¶10

Let the applicant Shahrookh be released on bail in Case Crime No.181 of 2018, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 302, 211, 120-B, 34 IPC, P.S. Jarcha, District Gautam Budh Nagar on furnishing a personal bond and two 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 :- 20.2.2019 Kpy

Shahrookh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shahrookh 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

Tej Pal Vs State of U.P.

Kewal Singh Vs State of U.P.

Bittu Alias Chandravir Vs State of U.P.

Chanchal Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Pushpendra Alias Pussu Ahirwar Vs State of U.P.

Kaley Vs State of U.P.