Allowed

Shahrukh Khan v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC17 Dec 2021BAIL/44621/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court considered a bail application filed by Shahrukh Khan. It held that the applicant has nothing to do with the recovery made from the co-accused, nothing incriminating was recovered from his possession, and no independent witness exists. Consequently, a case for bail was made out.

What did the court decide?

The applicant be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties, subject to conditions not to tamper with evidence or witnesses, to cooperate with trial, and not to indulge in crimina

Shahrukh Khan Vs State of U.P. — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 88

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 44621 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Shahrukh Khan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Syed Shahnawaz Shah Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Anil Kumar Ojha,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. 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 trial in connection with Case Crime No. 296 of 2021, under Section 419, 420, 466, 467, I.P.C. & Section 36/42 of The Aadhaar (targeted Delivery of Financial and other Subsidies, Benefits and Services) Act, 2016, registered at P.S.Parikshitgarh, District- Meerut.

¶7

Submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. The applicant has not committed the alleged offence. Nothing incriminating has been recovered from the possession of the applicant or on his pointing out. Whatever recovered, has been recovered from the shop of the co-accused Mazid. Applicant has nothing to do with the present case. Further submitted that case of the applicant is distinguishable from the case of coaccused Mazid as the alleged recovery of fake IDs, Laptops, eye scanner, have been made from the shop of co-accused Mazid. There is no independent witness in the present case. The applicant has no criminal history; he is languishing in jail since 14.08.2021.

¶8

Per contra, learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail.

¶9

Nature of accusation, evidence collected by I.O. in support of the charge, gravity of offence, nature and severity of punishment in case of conviction, complicity of the accused and all other attending circumstances were duly considered.

¶10

Considering the rival submissions of learned counsel for the parties, keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly the fact that nothing incriminating has been recovered from the possession of the applicant, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, a case for bail is

¶11

made out.

¶12

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed .

¶13

Let the applicant Shahrukh Khan involved in the aforesaid case crime, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions;

¶14

The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.

¶15

The applicant shall co-operate with the trial and shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for charge, evidence when the witnesses are present in the court, statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and argument.

¶16

During trial, he shall not indulge in any criminal activities.

¶17

In breach of any condition enumerated above, Trial Court shall be at liberty to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.

¶18

Order Date :- 17.12.2021 VPS

Shahrukh Khan v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shahrukh Khan 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

Shivam Chauhan Vs State of U.P.

Nadeem and 2 Others Vs State of U.P.

Vakeel Vs State of U.P.

Sadab Vs State of U.P.

Deepak Madheshiya Vs State of U.P.

Kuldeep Vs State of U.P.