Allowed

Samar Quraishi v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC14 Oct 2020BAIL/22852/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted bail to the applicant, Samar Quraishi, who was accused in a riot and murder case. The court, acknowledging the impact of the lockdown on arranging sureties, allowed the applicant to be released on a personal bond subject to strict conditions regarding trial participation and prohibition of adjournments, citing guidelines applicable during the pandemic.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail by furnishing a personal bond of Rs. One lac with two sureties or complying with the Court order regarding sureties during lockdown, subject to specific conditions of presence and con

Samar Quraishi Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 34

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 22852 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Samar Quraishi Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sushil Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Suneet Kumar,J.

¶5

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

¶6

It is urged that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the instant case; applicant claims parity with co-accused Khalid and Firoz @ Bolar Quraishi, who have been enlarged on bail by the coordinate Benches of this Court. It is urged that firearm is planted; there is no public witness, hence the applicant is also entitled to be enlarged on bail; applicant having no other reported criminal antecedent is languishing in jail since 14.5.2020, there is no likelihood of early disposal of trial and the applicant undertakes that if enlarged on bail, he will never misuse his liberty and will cooperate in the trial.

¶7

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶8

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tampering of the witnesses and prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case.

¶9

Let the applicant- Samar Quraishi involved in Case Crime No. 165 of 2020, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 414 I.P.C., Police Station Shahpur, District Muzaffar Nagar be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. One lac with two sureties (one should be of his family members) each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶10

(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶11

(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶12

(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against

¶13

him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶14

(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶15

(v) The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.

¶16

(vi) The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.

¶17

(vii) The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.

¶18

In view of the extraordinary situation prevailing in the State due to Covid19, the directions of this Court dated 6.4.2020 passed in Public Interest Litigation No. 564 of 2020 (In re vs. State of U.P.), shall also be complied.

¶19

The order reads thus:

¶20

"Looking to impediments in arranging sureties because of lockdown, while invoking powers under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, we deem it appropriate to order that all the accused-applicants whose bail applications came to be allowed on or after 15th March, 2020 but have not been released due to non-availability of sureties as a consequence to lockdown may be released on executing personal bond as ordered by the Court or to the satisfaction of the jail authorities where such accused is imprisoned, provided the accused-applicants undertakes to furnish required sureties within a period of one month from the date of his/her actual release."

¶21

Order Date :- 14.10.2020 S.Prakash

¶22

Digitally signed by Justice Suneet Kumar Date: 2020.10.15 17:52:48 IST Reason: Document Owner Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Samar Quraishi v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Samar Quraishi 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ekhlak Alias Lakha Vs State of U.P.

Sajid Vs State of U.P.

Tripathi Nath Saroj Vs State of U.P.

Minhaaj and and Another Vs State of U.P.

Karaivan Youon Mariyan Vs State of U.P.

Subhash Chand Vs State of U.P.