This court allowed a bail application filed by Amir and Adil in a criminal case involving offences under IPC and the Prevention of Damages to Public Properties Act, 1984. They were released on personal bond and sureties.
Released on bail via personal bond and two reliable sureties subject to undertaking and specific conditions of conduct.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 71
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4090 of 2020
Applicant :- Amir And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Preetam Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajendra Kumar-IV,J.
Heard Sri Preetam Yadav, learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for State and perused the material available on record.
Accused-applicants, involved in Case Crime No.565 of 2019, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 188, 332, 353, 307, 336, 395, 436, 427 I.P.C., Section 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act and Section 3/4 Prevention of Damages Public Properties Act, 1984, Police Station Firozabad South, District Firozabad, applied for bail.
Learned counsel for the applicants submits in following manner :-
(i) Applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case; they have committed no offence; entire prosecution story is false and fake.
(ii) The applicants were neither part of protest march nor they were in any way involved in the said march. Nothing has been recovered from the possession of the applicants and the recovery shown by the police is false one.
(iii) Co-accused Ahmad has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 29.1.2020 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 4060 of 2020 and the case of the applicants stands of identical footing, hence the applicants are also entitled for bail on the ground of parity.
(iii) Applicants are in jail since 20.12.2019. There is no possibility of the applicants' fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicants are enlarged on bail, they shall not misuse the liberty of bail.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but did not dispute the factual submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicants.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, rival contention of learned counsel for the parties, detention of applicant in jail, severity of punishment in case of conviction, evidence collected by I.O. during investigation and without commenting upon the merit of the case, applicants deserve bail.
Accordingly, bail application is allowed .
Let applicants Amir and Adil be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime on their furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties and filing an undertaking to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions:-
1. The applicants shall not tamper with the
evidence or threaten the witnesses.
2. The applicants 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.
3. During trial, they shall not indulge in any criminal activities or case.
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.
Order Date :- 5.2.2020 Manoj
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the accused applicants are eligible for bail given the nature of the offences and lack of flight risk.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Amir
Adil
Rajendra Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
