Akbar v. State of U.P.
Case brief
What is this about?
Single judge allowed bail to accused Akbar charged with murder, robbery, and theft. Court noted lack of FIR nomenclature, delayed recovery of stolen items without T.I.P., and co-accused's bail as grounds.
What did the court decide?
Accused Akbar released on bail furnished by personal bond with two sureties subject to no tampering, sincere cooperation, and no further crimes.
What the court decided
Court No. - 69
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 13277 of 2022
Applicant :- Akbar
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Manvendra Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Mohd. Faiz Alam Khan,J.
Heard Shri Manvendra Singh, learned counsel for the accused/applicant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
This bail application has been moved by the accused/applicant- Akbar for grant of bail, in Case Crime 228 of 2020, under Sections 302, 394, 411 IPC, Police Station Thariyaon, District Fatehpur, during trial.
Learned counsel for the accused-applicant while pressing the bail application submits that the accused-applicant has falsely been implicated in the instant case and he has not committed any offence as claimed by the prosecution. The story as cooked up by the police is highly improbable and could not be believed.
It is further submitted that the case of the prosecution as is evident from the material placed on record is to the tune that on 20.9.2020 when the father of the informant had gone to his jewelry shop, he was shot dead by unknown miscreants, who also alleged to have looted about 3.5 Kg. of silver and 40,000/rupees. The report of the incident was lodged on 21.9.2020. However, on 26.9.2020 one informer had informed the Investigating Officer pertaining to the presence of Rajan Lodhi @ Upendra Pratap Singh, Jhaller @ Sunil Rajput on the scene of the crime at the time of incident. Shri Sunil Rajput @ Jhaller appears to have been arrested on 1.10.2020 and confessed to have committed the offence along with other co-accused persons including the instant applicant with the exception that the role of firing on the head of the deceased was assigned to the co-accused Rajan Lodhi and certain jewellry items were also recovered from him.
Issues for consideration
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to bail in a case involving charges under Sections 302 and 394 IPC.
Whether the delay in recovery of stolen articles and absence of T.I.P. casts a doubt necessitating bail.
Whether the grant of bail to a co-accused with a graver role impacts the decision.
Parties & counsel
- applicant
Akbar
Coram
Mohd. Faiz Alam Khan
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Allahabad HC
- Decided on
- · April
- Registered
- Case no.
- BAIL/13277/2022
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court