Allowed

Shahabuddin v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC6 Jan 2021BAIL/34716/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a bail application filed by the applicant in a case involving Sections 420, 406, 504, and 506 IPC. The apex court released the applicant on personal bond and two local sureties, subject to standard conditions regarding court attendance and tampering with evidence.

What did the court decide?

The applicant is to be released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties, subject to specific conditions of non-tampering and court attendance.

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

¶1

Court No . - 70

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 34716 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Shahabuddin Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Atiqur Rahman Siddiqui 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 0363 of 2016, under Sections 420, 406, 504, 506 IPC, P.S. Amroha Nagar, District Amroha.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that according to prosecution, applicant introduced one Imran Ahmad for sending the informant to Saudi Arab/Dubai and amount was transferred to the account of Imran and his wife Rubina Parveen. After transferring of amount fraudulently, they did not keep any communication with the informant. He further submits that Rubina Parveen,wife of Imran has been enlarged on bail by the court below. He also submits that 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 and the applicant is languishing in jail since 17.08.2020.

¶8

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant and submits that it is the applicant, who introduced Imran Ahmand and before whom money was paid.

¶9

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perusing the material on record, without expressing any opinion on merit of the case, the applicant is entitled for bail, let the applicant Shahabuddin involved in aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his 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

¶11

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.

¶12

(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.

¶13

(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.

¶14

(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.

¶15

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

¶16

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 of cancellation of bail.

¶17

Order Date :- 6.1.2021 MAA/-

Shahabuddin v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shahabuddin 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Saleem Vs State of U.P.

Farukh Vs State of U.P.

Manoj Kumar Patel @ Raj Kumar Patel Vs State of U.P.

Soran Singh Vs State of U.P.

Santram Vs State of U.P.

Vishal @ Dabu Vs State of U.P.