Allowed

Shaheed @ Saeed Ahmad and Another v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC14 Dec 2020BAIL/43432/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single-judge bench allowed bail applicants in a rape case alleging false implication. The court held prima facie that a case for bail is made out, granting release on personal bond and sureties subject to specific attendance and conduct conditions.

What did the court decide?

Release of applicants on personal bond and two local sureties subject to undertaking on attendance and rupture.

Shaheed @ Saeed Ahmad and Another Vs State of U.P. — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 76

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 43432 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Shaheed @ Saeed Ahmad And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mohd. Akbar Shah Alam Khan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ajit Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the entire record.

¶6

The present bail application has been filed by the applicants in S.T. No. 447 of 2019 arising out of Case Crime No. 45 of 2019, under Sections 376-D, 506 I.P.C., Police Station- Deoband, District- Saharanpur during pendency of trial.

¶7

The first information report of this incident was lodged by the complainant (the victim) against the accused persons on an application being moved under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. and the allegation about raping the complainant was levelled against four named persons and one unknown person in the first information report.

¶8

The contention as raised at the Bar by learned counsel for the applicants is that applicants are quite innocent and they have been falsely implicated in the present case. It is also submitted that the medical examination report is not supportive of the allegation of rape. Learned counsel further submits that coaccused Shamim has already been granted bail by another Bench of this Court, vide order dated 06.08.2020, in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 16753 of 2020 (Shamim Vs. State of U.P.) and a copy of his bail order is annexed at page No. 89 of this bail application and on the ground parity with co-accused Shami, the present applicants are entitled to be released on bail. Lastly, It is argued that the applicant is in jail since 06.11.2020 and that in case they are enlarged on bail, they will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail.

¶10

Keeping in view the submission of learned counsel for the parties, period of detention of the applicant and all the attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, at this stage, prima facie, a case for bail has been made out.

¶11

The prayer for bail is granted. The application is allowed.

¶12

Let applicants - Shaheed @ Saeed Ahmad and Hasib involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on each of them furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties to the satisfaction of court concerned subject to the following conditions:-

¶13

(1). The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence and 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;

¶14

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

¶15

(3). In case, the applicants misuse the liberty of bail and in order to secure their presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicants fail to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court may initiate proceedings against them, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶16

(4). The applicants 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 default of this condition is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of their bail and proceed against them in accordance with law.

¶17

The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by the learned counsel for the applicant along with a self attested identity proof of the said persons (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number (s) to which the said Aadhar Card is linked before the concerned Court/Authority/Official.

¶18

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. Order Date :- 14.12.2020 LBY

Shaheed @ Saeed Ahmad and Another v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shaheed @ Saeed Ahmad and Another 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

Shivpal Gautam Vs State of U.P.

Mobin Vs State of U.P.

Wasim Vs State of U.P.

Ravi Varma @ Ravindra Vs State of U.P.

Sunil and Another Vs State of U.P.

Badal Vs State of U.P.