Allowed

Amir v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC22 Nov 2021BAIL/28255/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this bail application, the court allowed the release on bail of the applicant Amir, who was an undergraduate student falsely implicated in a riot case. Considering the jail overcrowding due to the COVID-19 pandemic and the lack of involvement in a vital injury, the court granted bail.

What did the court decide?

The applicant Amir is released on bail furnished by a personal bond and two sureties in the like amount.

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

¶1

Court No. - 66

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 28255 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Amir Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Radhey Shyam Yadav,Arvind Kumar,Jitendra Ojha,Navin Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Rajeev Kumar Singh Parmar

¶4

Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Navin Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State.

¶6

A first information report was lodged against the applicant as Case Crime No. 0141 of 2020 at Police Station-Jahanganj- District Fatehgarh on 02.08.2020 under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 504, 506, 336, 188, 270, 34 IPC and Section 3 of Epidemic Diseases Act.

¶7

The bail application of the applicant was rejected by learned Special Judge D.A.A/ III Additional Sessions Judge, Farukhabad.

¶8

The applicant is in jail since 11.04.2021, pursuant to the said F.I.R.

¶9

Sri Navin Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant is an under graduate student who has been falsely implicated in the instant case. A general role has been attributed in the FIR to four persons. Both sides have received injuries in the incident. Only one person has suffered an injury on a vital part, which is not attributable to the applicant. The case of applicant is distinguishable from other, inasmuch as he is a B.Sc student whose academic future will be irreparably blighted if he continues to be in jail. The applicant was not involved in any other heinous criminal offence. Lastly it is submitted by Sri Navin Kumar Pandey, 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.

¶10

Learned A.G.A could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.

¶11

Courts have taken notice of the overcrowding of jails during the current pandemic situation ( Ref.: Suo Motu Writ Petition (c) No. 1/2020,

¶12

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 Sri Navin Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant and accordingly 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- Amir be released on bail in Case Crime No.141 of 2020 at Police StationJahanganj District-Farrukhabad under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 324, 325, 504, 506, 336, 188, 307, 270/ 34 IPC and Section 3 of Epidemic Diseases Act, on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below. The following conditions be imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶16

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶17

(ii) The applicant will not influence any witness.

¶18

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

¶19

(iv) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make 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 condition, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.

¶21

Order Date :- 22.11.2021 Nadeem

Amir v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amir 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri Gautam Vs State of U P and 4 Others

Manoj Kumar Rastogi Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Uma Shankar Dixit Vs State of U.P. through Its Principal Secretary,Public Works Department U.P. Govt.and 4 Others

Vikas Hawaldar Vs State of U.P.

Nittar @ Netrapal Vs State of U.P.

Sarfaraz @ oni Vs State of U.P.