Allowed

Irfan v. State of Up

Allahabad HC3 Dec 2021BAIL/17122/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the Criminal Misc. Bail Application of Irfan, an accused under the UP Gangsters Act. The court found merit in the counsel's submission regarding false implication and considered jail overcrowding. The applicant was released on bail subject to standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Bail allowed on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties subject to conditions of appearing in court and not tampering with evidence or witnesses.

Irfan Vs State of Up — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 66

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 17122 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Irfan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mohammad Belal Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.

¶5

Heard Shri Mohammad Belal, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Indra Prakash Srivastava, learned AGA for the State.

¶6

A first information report was lodged as Case Crime No.455 of 2019 at Police Station-Garh Mukteshwar, District-Hapur under Section 2/3 of the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986.

¶7

The bail application of the applicant was rejected by learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Hapur on 21.05.2020.

¶8

The applicant is in jail since 11.10.2019, pursuant to the said F.I.R.

¶9

Shri Mohammad Belal, learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. The applicant has been enlarged on bail in the four criminal cases depicted in the gang chart. He is not a member of any criminal gang. Explaining the criminal history of the applicant, learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant has become a soft target who repeatedly nominated him in nine unnamed F.I.Rs. in a single day

¶10

only to burnish the credentials of the police authorities. Lastly it is contended by the learned counsel for applicant that the applicant shall not abscond and will fully cooperate in the criminal law proceedings. The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence nor influence the witnesses in any manner.

¶11

Learned A.G.A could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. However, he does not contest the criminal history of the applicant as disclosed in the bail application.

¶12

Courts have taken notice of the 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.

¶13

I see merit in the submissions of the learned counsel for the applicant and hold that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶14

In the light of the preceding discussion and without making any observations on the merits of the case, the bail application is allowed.

¶15

Let the applicant-Irfan involved in Case Crime No.455 of 2019 at Police Station-Garh Mukteshwar, DistrictHapur under Section 2/3 of the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, be released on bail on furnishing a personal

¶16

bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions.

¶17

The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶18

The applicant will not influence any witness.

¶19

The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶20

The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶21

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.

¶22

Order Date :- 3.12.2021

¶23

Ashish Tripathi

¶24

Digitally signed by AJAY BHANOT Date: 2021.12.06 11:34:12 IST Reason: Document Owner Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Irfan v. State of Up

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Irfan v. State of Up

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

Santosh Singh @ Banti Vs State of U.P.

Rajendra Kumar Jaiswal Vs Union of India

Sahil Kazmi Vs State of U.P.

Banti Sahu @ Shivendra Vs State of U.P. and Another

Pramod Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Vikas Rai Vs State of U.P.