Allowed

Lalla @ Mahboob v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC21 Feb 2019BAIL/7429/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Criminal Misc. Bail Application was allowed. The court found it a fit case for the release of the applicant on bail pending trial, subject to furnishing a personal bond and two sureties and adhering to standard conditions of bail.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned court, subject to standard conditions.

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

¶1

Court No. - 45

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7429 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Lalla @ Mahboob Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rajesh Dwivedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Harsh Kumar,J.

¶5

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

¶6

Learned counsel for applicant contended that applicant is not named in F.I.R. lodged on 3.7.2018 by father of deceased with allegations that his son Peshakar Shakya, who was running Tanuj Gift House and Furniture electronic shop, returned home in the night of 1.7.2018 and upon phone call again went to shop and did not return over night and next morning when his grandson reached at the shop with his lunch, shutter of shop was half opened and Peshkar was not on shop and in the meantime, he as well as wife of deceased got ransom call for Rs.30,00,000/- and on 3.7.2018 upon finding foul smell, his dead body was recovered from inside dewan within shop and since then motorcycle of his son as well as 04 LED Televisions were missing from shop; that after a period of 05 days on 8.7.2018 Komal Goswami is alleged to have been apprehended by police with recovery of stolen motorcycle of deceased and one LED and applicant's name has surfaced in his confessional statement; that thereafter arrest of applicant is alleged to have been made on 11.7.2018 with recovery of one more LED; that recovery of LED from applicant has been falsely planted, of which there is no independent witness; that applicant has no criminal history, except that at the time of arrest an unauthorized fire arm was also planted on him; that applicant undertakes that he will not misuse liberty of bail; that applicant is in custody since 11.7.2018.

¶7

Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the 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 Lalla @ Mahboob be released on bail in Case Crime No.325 of 2018, under Sections 302, 201, 364-A, 380,

¶10

411 IPC, P.S. Kishani, District Mainpuri 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. Order Date :- 21.2.2019 Tamang

Lalla @ Mahboob v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lalla @ Mahboob v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Chanchal Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Shahrookh Vs State of U.P.

Pushpendra Alias Pussu Ahirwar Vs State of U.P.

Shivam Singh Vs State of U.P.

Smt. Ishrat Jahan Vs State of U.P.

Guddu Shaikh Vs State of U.P.