Sufiyan v. State of U.P.
Case brief
What is this about?
Criminal Miscellaneous anticipatory bail application filed by Sufiyan in a case involving grievous injuries and firearm use. The Single Judge rejected the prayer for anticipatory bail.
What did the court decide?
Anticipatory bail application rejected. Order not a fit case for interference.
What the court decided
Court No. - 71
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 1120 of 2022
Applicant :- Sufiyan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sushil Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Nasira Adil
Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.
Heard Sri Sushil Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri N.I. Jafri, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Ms. Nasira Adil, learned counsel for the first informant and Sri B.B. Upadhyay, learned counsel for the State and perused the record.
Ms. Nasira Adil, learned counsel for the first informant states that she has filed her vakalatnama in the office on 17.02.2022 but the same is not on record.
Office is directed to trace out the same and place it on record and make a note in the order sheet therein.
The anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant Sufiyan , seeking anticipatory bail, in the event of arrest in Case Crime No. 424 of 2021, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 307, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Shahpur, District Muzaffar Nagar.
Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is argued that common and general role has been assigned to the applicant along with nine other persons in the First Information Report. It is argued that although the injured Husaindeen was found to have received five injuries out of which the injury nos. 1, 2, 3 and 5 were kept under observation whereas the other injuries were simple in nature and the said four injuries were subjected to x-ray examination after which a supplementary report was given in which the injury no.2 was opined to be grievous in nature and dangerous to his life and injury no.5 was grievous in nature. The author of the said injury is not known. It is further argued that the First Information Report is of ante-time document. The applicant has no criminal history as stated in para 21 of the affidavit in support of the anticipatory bail application.
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the anticipatory bail application filed by the applicant should be allowed given the allegations of participation in an incident involving grievous injuries and use of a firearm.
Parties & counsel
- applicant
Sufiyan
- respondent
State of U.P.
Coram
Samit Gopal
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Allahabad HC
- Decided on
- · February
- Registered
- Case no.
- ABAIL/1120/2022
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court