Allowed

Naiyar Alam v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC17 Sept 2021BAIL/11988/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application, the High Court of Allahabad released the applicant, Naiyar Alam, charged with offences under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, and 471 of the IPC. The court granted bail on a personal bond and two sureties, emphasizing jail overcrowding and the need for expeditious trial.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on personal bond and two sureties of Rs. 3 lakh each; trial to conclude within six months.

Naiyar Alam Vs State of U.P. — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 71

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11988 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Naiyar Alam Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sanjay Vikram Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Mohd. Arham

¶4

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

Heard Sri V.P. Srivastava, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Sanjay Vikram Singh, learned counsel for the applicant; Sri G.S. Chaturvedi, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Mohd. Arham, learned counsel for the informant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶6

The submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. It is further submitted that there is some civil dispute; applicant is General Power of Attorney Holder of Hasrat, Mansoor, etc. since 1994; applicant's name is there in revenue record i.e. Form-45, Form-41 and also Khatauni since 1994 and those entries have never been challenged in any Court of law; and the applicant has also filed an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. It is also contended that there are general allegations and a concocted and false story has been set up by the prosecution whereas the applicant did not commit any offence as alleged. The applicant has properly explained the criminal history in paragraph-10 of the rejoinder affidavit. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused have also been touched upon at length. It has been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required. The applicant is languishing in jail since 20.1.2021. He undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty, if granted, therefore, he may be released on bail.

¶7

Learned counsel appearing for the opposite party vehemently opposed the prayer.

¶8

Courts have taken notice of overcrowding of jails during the current pandemic situation (Ref.: Suo Motu Writ Petition (c) No. 1/2020, Contagion of Covid 19 Virus in prisons before the Supreme Court of India). These circumstances shall also be factored in while considering bail applications on behalf of accused persons.

¶9

Having heard submissions of learned counsel of both sides, considering nature of accusation, severity of punishment in case of conviction, nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh v. State of U.P. and

¶10

another, (2018) 3 SCC 22 , without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I find it to be a case of bail.

¶11

Let the applicant- Naiyar Alam involved in Case Crime No. 395 of 2020, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC, Police Station Line Bazar, District Jaunpur be released on bail, on his executing a personal bond and two sureties of Rs. Three Lakh each (one should be of a family member), with the following conditions:

¶12

The applicant will attend and co-operate the trial proceedings pending before the court concerned on the date fixed after release.

¶13

He will not tamper with the witnesses.

¶14

He will not indulge in any illegal activities during the bail period.

¶15

The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by the court concerned and in case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

¶16

It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case. The Trial Court shall take endeavour to conclude the trial expeditiously, preferably within six months from the date of production of a copy of this order, if there is no legal impediment.

¶17

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶18

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

¶19

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

¶20

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.

¶21

Order Date :- 17.9.2021 Digamber

Naiyar Alam v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Naiyar Alam 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

Shaukat Vs State of U.P.

Usman Khan Vs State of U.P.

Haneef Vs State of U.P.

Firoz Shamshad Khan Vs State of U.P.

Gulam Nabi Vs State of U.P.

Mustkeem Taumar Vs State of U.P.