Allowed

Zeeshan v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC3 Dec 2021BAIL/39050/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under Section 439 CrPC, the court held the case suitable for bail despite opposition, citing parity with co-accused already released. The application allowed with conditions ensuring trial attendance and no abuse of liberty.

What did the court decide?

Applicant Zeeshan released on bail furnishing personal bond and two sureties subject to conditions of appearance and conduct.

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

¶1

Court No. - 83

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 39050 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Zeeshan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mahboob Ahmad Siddiqui,Faizul Hasan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Mukesh Joshi

¶4

Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Faizul Hasan, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Manish Joshi, learned counsel holding brief of Sri Mukesh Joshi, learned counsel for the opposite party, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶6

This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant seeking enlargement on bail during the trial in Case Crime No. 329 of 2021, under Section 392, 411, 120-B I.P.C., at Police Station-Katghar, District- Moradabad.

¶7

It is contended that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. The applicant is in jail since 9.7.2021.

¶8

It is next submitted that co-accused Fareed, Mohammad Faizan and Saahurukh, have been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 27.11.2021, 8.10.2021 and 30.11.2021 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 39053 of 2021, 36423 of 2021 and 39681 of 2021, therefore, applicant is also entitled to be released on bail on the ground of parity.

¶9

I have perused the bail orders and find that the role assigned to the present applicant is almost similar to the co-accused persons who have already been enlarged on bail by this Court.

¶10

On the other hand, learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for respondent opposed the application for bail.

¶11

Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, perusal of record and considering the complicity of accused, severity of punishment as well as totality of facts and circumstances, at this stage without commenting on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail.

¶12

Let the applicant- Zeeshan, who is involved in aforementioned

¶13

case 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.

¶14

(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the date 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.

¶15

(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 IPC.

¶16

(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., may be issued and if 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 IPC.

¶17

(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the Trial Court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) 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.

¶18

(v) The Trial Court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial within a period of one year after the release of the applicant.

¶19

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

¶20

It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.

¶21

Order Date :- 3.12.2021 S.K.

Zeeshan v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Zeeshan 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

Sikandar Gihar Vs State of U.P.

Ram Naresh Singh @ Lala Vs State of U.P.

Rajesh Pal @ Sonu Vs State of U.P.

Abhishek Vs State of U.P.

Devendra Lodhi Vs State of U.P.

Jay Singh Vs State of U.P.