Allowed

Imran Khan v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC22 Jan 2020BAIL/3536/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court allowed bail application of Imran Khan involved in theft and punishable offences under IPC, granting release on personal bond with two sureties subject to standard conditions regarding evidence tampering and trial conduct.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties with an undertaking subject to specified conditions including not tampering with evidence and cooperating with the trial.

Imran Khan Vs State of U.P. — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 71

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3536 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Imran Khan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Bindu Kumari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rajendra Kumar-IV,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for State and perused the material available on record.

¶6

Accused-applicant, involved in Case Crime No. 309 of 2016, under Sections 379, 41, 411, 414, 419, 420, 467, 468 and 471 IPC, Police Station Obra, District Sonebhadra, applied for bail.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. Accused applicant is not named in the FIR; his name came and light during investigation and has been arrested after one and half years; nothing has been recovered from the possession of the accused-applicant; recovery shown by Police is false and fake. It is further submitted that the applicant has never been involved in the commission of crime; there is no public witness. Accused-applicant is languishing in Jail since 1.4.2018. It is further contended that co-accused-Anil Kumar has already been granted bail, vide order dated 01.03.2019 passed Sessions Judge, Sonbhadra, in Bail Application No.238 of 2019 by Trial Court and the case of the applicant stands on identical footing, hence, the applicant is also entitled for bail on the ground of parity.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but did not dispute the factual submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶9

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, rival contentions of learned counsel for the parties, detention of applicant in jail, severity of punishment in case of conviction and without commenting upon the merit of the case, applicant deserves bail.

¶10

Accordingly, bail application is allowed.

¶11

Let applicant-Imran Khan be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable

¶12

sureties and filing an undertaking to the satisfaction of the Court concerned subject to the following conditions:-

¶13

The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.

¶14

The applicant shall co-operate with the trial and shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for charge, evidence when the witnesses are present in the court, statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and argument.

¶15

During trial, applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activities or case.

¶16

In breach of any condition enumerated above, Trial Court shall be at liberty to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.

¶17

Order Date :- 22.1.2020 Akram

Imran Khan v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Imran Khan 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

Mahesh Vs State of U.P.

Ajay Veer Alias Shera Vs State of U.P.

Mohd. Waris Vs State of U.P.

Shriram Vs State of U.P.

Rinku and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Pramod Vs State of U.P.