Rihan v. State of U.P.
Case brief
What is this about?
Court allowed bail application by applicant Rihan in a criminal case involving Section 392 IPC, finding merit in submissions regarding potential false implication and lack of connection to the offence.
What did the court decide?
Granted bail to the applicant on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties subject to specified conditions.
What the court decided
Court No. - 68
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11939 of 2022
Applicant :- Rihan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Anil Kumar Ojha Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.
By means of this bail application the applicant has prayed to be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No.1133 of 2021 at Police Station-Kavi Nagar, District-Ghaziabad under Section 392 IPC. The applicant is in jail since 29.09.2021.
The bail application of the applicant was rejected by learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Court No.3, Ghaziabad on 29.11.2021.
Shri Sunil Kumar Upadhyay, learned counsel holding brief of Shri Anil Kumar Ojha, learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. One countrymade pistol, one live cartridge, one mobile phone and one motorcycle were planted on the applicant to implicate him in this case to show the proficiency of the police authorities. There is no independent witness to the alleged recovery. Prosecution evidence does not connect the applicant with the offence. Explaining the criminal history of the applicant learned counsel for the applicant contends that being from
economically weaker section of the society the applicant has become an easy scapegoat for the police authorities who have falsely implicated him in a number of cases to burnish their credentials. The applicant has never misused the liberty of bail granted to him in the said cases. The said cases do not relate to any heinous crimes and have no bearing on this bail application. The applicant is not a flight risk. Lastly it is contended by the learned counsel for applicant that the applicant shall not abscond and will cooperate in the criminal law proceedings. The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence nor influence the witnesses in any manner.
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to bail given the allegations of false implication and lack of independent witnesses.
Parties & counsel
- applicant
Rihan
- respondent
State of U.P.
Coram
Ajay Bhanot
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Allahabad HC
- Decided on
- · April
- Registered
- Case no.
- BAIL/11939/2022
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court