Allowed

Sami Ahmad v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC5 Jul 2022BAIL/10223/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This discretely reasoned bail order allowed the application of Sami Ahmad charged under IPC Sections 406, 504, 506, 420. The court found a prima facie case for bail based on lack of a rent agreement and duration of detention, granting release on personal bond and two sureties.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail with personal bond and two local sureties subject to undertaking regarding court presence.

Sami Ahmad Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 77

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 10223 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Sami Ahmad Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Raj Kumar Mishra,Sushil Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ajit Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the entire record.

¶6

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in Case Crime No. 618 of 2021, under Sections 406, 504, 506, 420, 411, 413, 414, 467, 468, 471, 120B IPC, Police Station - Diviyaur, District - Auraiya with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail.

¶7

Allegation in the FIR is that present accused Sami Ahmad and co-accused Kotwaal had taken the truck of complainant on rent and the truck was plied but rent was not paid.

¶8

The contention as raised at the Bar by learned counsel for the applicant is that applicant-accused is quite innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that there are only frivolous allegations made in the First Information Report. It is also argued that no agreement was executed between the parties to tun the truck on rent. Next argument is that the offence is triable by the court of Magistrate. Lastly, it is argued that the applicant is in jail since 30.11.2021 and that in case applicant is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail.

¶10

Keeping in view the submission of learned counsel for the parties, considering that there is not agreement between the parties to ply the truck on rent, considering the period of detention of the applicant and considering all other attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, at this stage, prima facie, a case for bail has been made out.

¶11

The prayer for bail is granted. The application is allowed.

¶12

Let applicant Sami Ahmad involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties to the satisfaction of court concerned subject to the following conditions:-

¶13

(1). The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence and 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;

¶14

(2). 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

¶15

Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code;

¶16

(3). In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail 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 may initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶17

(4). 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 default of this condition is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶18

Order Date :- 5.7.2022 LBY

¶19

Digitally signed by LAL BAHADUR YADAV Date: 2022.07.12 10:35:05 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sami Ahmad v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sami Ahmad 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Anil Sain Vs State of U.P.

Uday Raj Vs State of U.P.

Saddam Vs State of U.P.

Jasdeep Singh Sahdev @ Gagan Vs State of U.P.

Hamid Hussain Vs State of U.P.

Smt. Shiba Vs State of U.P.