Allowed

Sartaj v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC1 Dec 2021BAIL/28024/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court allowed bail to applicant Sartaj in a case involving offences under Sections 392 and 411 IPC. Relieving him from jail custody upon furnishing a personal bond and two sureties subject to conditions regarding evidence tampering and witness influence.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail by furnishing personal bond and two sureties subject to strict conditions prohibiting tampering with evidence or witnesses.

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

¶1

Court No. - 66

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 28024 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Sartaj Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Saif Ali,Nizam Khan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.

¶5

Heard Shri Saif Ali, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Nafees Ahmad, learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶6

A first information report was lodged as Case Crime No.217 of 2020 at Police Station-Faijganj Behta, District-Budaun under Sections 392, 411 IPC.

¶7

The bail application of the applicant was rejected by learned Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge (Dacoity Affected Areas), Budaun on 19.03.2021.

¶8

The applicant is in jail since 15.09.2020, pursuant to the said F.I.R.

¶9

Shri Saif Ali, learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. Some ornaments have been recovered from the joint possession of the two coaccused persons including the applicant. The ornaments was planted on the person of the applicant to frame him in the instant case to show proficiency of police investigators. There is no independent witness to the recovery. Learned counsel for the applicant has explained the criminal history of the applicant and contends that the same has no bearing on the instant case. Lastly it is contended by the learned counsel for

¶10

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 dispute 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-Sartaj involved in Case Crime No.217 of 2020 at Police Station-Faijganj Behta, District-Budaun under Sections 392, 411 IPC, be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions.

¶16

The applicant will not tamper with the evidence

¶17

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. 4. 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.

¶20

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

¶21

Order Date :- 1.12.2021

¶22

Ashish Tripathi

Sartaj v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sartaj 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

Monu Vs State of U.P.

Yogesh Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Govind Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Vishal Vs State of U.P. and Another

Arun @ Monu Vs State of U.P.

Ram Kripal Vs State of U.P.