Allowed

Azad v. State of Up

Allahabad HC14 Sept 2021BAIL/27885/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this criminal miscellaneous bail application, the court considered the applicant's submission regarding false implication and parity with a co-accused. Relying on constitutional principles and citing an Apex Court dictum, the court found it to be a case of bail and granted release upon furnishing a personal bond and two sureties.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties, subject to standard conditions of bail.

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

¶1

Court No. - 79

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 27885 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Azad Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Chandra Prakash Singh,Ashish Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rajiv Joshi,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Ashish Singh, learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶6

Accused-applicant, involved in Case Crime No. 142 of 2021, under Sections147, 148, 149, 332, 353, 336, 427, 504, 307 IPC, Section 7 Criminal Law (Amendment) Act and Section 3/5/8 Cow Slaughter Act, Police StationNehtaur, District- Bijnor.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. There is no independent witness of the alleged incident. It is further submitted that nothing has been recovered from the possession of the applicant. There are no reported criminal antecedents against the applicant as stated in paragraph no. 13 to the affidavit filed in support of the bail application. It is next submitted that co-accused Shamshad, has been enlarged on bail by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 30259 of 2021 vide order dated 2.9.2021. The case of the applicant stands on identical footing, hence the applicant is also entitled for bail on the ground of parity. The applicant is in jail since 26.5.2021 and if he is released on bail, there is no chance of his absconding or misusing the liberty of bail or tampering with the prosecution witnesses.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application but could not dispute the arguments advanced by learned Counsel for the applicant.

¶9

Having heard the submissions of learned counsel of both sides, nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment, and larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh v. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 2 SCC 22 and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a case of bail.

¶10

Let the applicant, Azad who is involved in aforesaid crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶11

The applicant will attend and co-operate the trial proceedings pending before

¶12

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.

¶17

In case of breach of 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 :- 14.9.2021 Sweety

¶22

Digitally signed by Justice Rajiv Joshi Date: 2021.09.14 16:22:01 IST Reason: Document Owner Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Azad v. State of Up

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Azad 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

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Lalit Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Rajesh Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Rohit Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Pramod Tyagi Vs State of U.P.

Mohammad Hafiz Vs State of U.P.

Mohd. Gufran Vs State of U.P.