Allowed

Mohd. Zahid v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC3 Aug 2021BAIL/18058/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail application filed by Mohd. Zahid in a cow slaughter case. Granting bail citing parity with co-accused already released. Imposing standard bail conditions including personal bond, sureties, and undertaking not to tamper with evidence.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties subject to conditions regarding tampering with evidence and court attendance.

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

¶1

Court No. - 66

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 18058 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Mohd. Zahid Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Lal Prabhakar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ali Zamin,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.

¶6

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 076 of 2021, under Sections 3/5/8 Cow Slaughter Act, Police Station Alapur, District Badaun.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that Nusrat Ali, Mohd. Naim and Mohd. Nadeem applicant and 2 others were arrested on the spot along with 217kg beef. The co-accused Nusrat Ali, Mohd. Naim and Mohd. Nadeem have been granted bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide orders dated 15.07.2021, 30.07.2021 and 30.07.2021 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 19375 of 2021, 18066 of 2021 & 17728 of 2021, therefore, the applicant is entitled for bail on the ground of parity. There is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses and, in case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail. It is next contended that there are 2 criminal history of the applicant which have been explained in Paragraph- 4 & 5 of the affidavit and he is languishing in jail since 08.03.2021.

¶8

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant but could not dispute the aforesaid fact that coaccused have already been released on bail.

¶9

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and also perusing the material on record, enlargement of co-accused on bail, without expressing any opinion on merit of the case, the applicant is entitled for bail, let the applicant- Mohd. Zahid involved in aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his/her furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions :-

¶10

(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he will not tamper with the evidence and will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and will cooperate with the trial. The applicant shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when 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.

¶11

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

¶12

(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶13

(iv) The applicant 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 absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶14

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

¶15

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

¶16

Order Date :- 3.8.2021 Israr

Mohd. Zahid v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd. Zahid 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Adesh Vikal Vs State of U.P.

Pawan Vs State of U.P.

Pramod Baghel Vs State of U.P.

Firoj Vs State of Up

Mazid Vs State of u,p

Monu Pal Vs State of U.P.