Muneesh v. State of U.P.
Case brief
What is this about?
The Single Judge allowed a second bail application in a kidnapping case. The court found the applicant's case distinguishable from others due to lack of naming in the initial FIR and granted bail with conditions.
What did the court decide?
Release of the applicant Muneesh on bail with a personal bond and two sureties.
What the court decided
Court No. - 40
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7574 of 2018
Applicant :- Muneesh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Om Prakash Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Anant Ram Gupta
Hon'ble Harsh Kumar,J.
Rejoinder affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant today in the Court, is taken on record.
This is second bail application after rejection of first bail application for non prosecution vide order dated 3.1.2018.
Heard Shri Om Prakash, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State, Shri Anant Ram, learned counsel for the first informant and perused the record.
Learned counsel for the applicant contended that the applicant is not named in the FIR in respect of kidnapping of Rahamat Ali in the night of 23/24.02.2016; that as per the prosecution, the kidnapped person was recovered on 07.03.2016 along with coaccused Jitendra Yadav and Shyamuddin while three accused allegedly fled away; that in his statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C., the kidnapped person Rahamat Ali has not named applicant and applicant's name has been mentioned by him in subsequent statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. recorded on 13.03.2016 upon improvement; that name of applicant surfaced in the statement of Jitendra and Shyamuddin; that co-accused Ishrat, Satya Prkash and Lalla Bhaiya with identical role have been granted bail by this Court vide orders dated 13.12.2016, 21.12.2016 and 20.1.2017 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos.22620 of 2016, 36829 of 2016 and 2646 of 2017, copies filed at Annexure-6; that co-accused Shyamuddin, who was arrested at the time of recovery of kidnapped person, has also been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 7.1.2019 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.19869 of 2017, copy filed at Annexure-SA-2; that the case of applicant is distinguishable from co-accused Jitendra Yadav and Shyamuddin; that applicant has explained his criminal history in para 10 of affidavit given in support of bail application and para 4 of supplementary affidavit; that the applicant undertakes that he will not make misuse the liberty of bail; that the applicant is in custody since 25.05.2016.
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether bail should be granted in a kidnapping trial where the applicant was not named in the initial FIR but appeared in later statements.
Whether the distinction between the applicant and co-accused previously granted bail warrants release in these present bail proceedings.
Parties & counsel
- applicant
Muneesh
Coram
Harsh Kumar
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Allahabad HC
- Decided on
- · May
- Registered
- Case no.
- BAIL/7574/2018
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court