Allowed

Mohd. Asif v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC16 Jun 2021BAIL/15099/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed the bail application of Mohd. Asif involved in Case Crime No. 966 of 2020 under various sections of the IPC. The applicant, languishing in jail, was ordered to be released on a personal bond and sureties with standard conditions, while noting that observations were confined to bail disposal.

What did the court decide?

Release of the applicant on a personal bond and two sureties subject to conditions of attending trial, not tampering with witnesses, and not indulging in illegal activities.

Mohd. Asif Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 67

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 15099 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Mohd. Asif Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Hari Om Sharan Tiwari,Sanjay Shukla

¶4

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Sanjay Singh, learned AGA-I for the State and perused the record.

¶7

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 he has no previous criminal history and all the cases mentioned in paragraph-13 of the affidavit filed in support of bail application were lodged after the present one. It is next contended that there are general allegations and a concocted and false story has been set up by the prosecution whereas the applicant has not committed any offence as alleged. 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 29.12.2020. He undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty, if granted, therefore, he may be released on bail.

¶8

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

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

¶10

Let the applicant- Mohd. Asif involved in Case Crime No. 966 of 2020, under Sections 379, 411, 482, 427, 120-B IPC, Police Station Sector-20 Noida, District Gautam Buddh Nagar be released on bail, on his executing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, with the following conditions:

¶11

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

¶12

He will not tamper with the witnesses.

¶13

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

¶14

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.

¶15

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.

¶16

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

¶17

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

¶18

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

¶19

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.

¶20

Order Date :- 16.6.2021 Digamber

Mohd. Asif v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd. Asif 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

Om Prakash @ Tyagi @ Yogi Vs State of U.P. and Another

Arman and Another Vs State of U.P.

Sonoo Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Pradeep Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Mahesh Vs State of U.P.

Satendra Nishad Vs State of U.P.