Allowed¶10

Aameen v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC18 Aug 2022BAIL/19970/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad High Court (Mayank Kumar Jain, J.), order dated 18.8.2022, in CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 19970 of 2022 (Aameen v. State of U.P.): bail allowed in Case Crime No. 220 of 2022 under Sections 342, 394, 506, 411 IPC, Police Station Izzat Nagar, District Bareilly, primarily on the ground of parity with co-accused Aqeel @ Aqeela and Rajeev @ Arif already released on bail (orders dated 13.07.2022 and 29.07.2022); applicant in jail since 03.04.2022; release on personal bond and two sureties with standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Applicant Aameen to be released on bail in Case Crime No. 220 of 2022 under Sections 342, 394, 506, 411 IPC, Police Station Izzat Nagar, District Bareilly, on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount, subject to the enumerated conditions. ¶10

Aameen Vs State of U.P. — Allahabad HC (2022) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶10

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant Aameen should be released on bail in Case Crime No. 220 of 2022 under Sections 342, 394, 506, 411 IPC, Police Station Izzat Nagar, District Bareilly, during pendency of the trial.

¶6

Court's answer

The Court found it a fit case for grant of bail, having regard to the facts and circumstances including that the case set up against the applicant is similar to that against co-accused persons already released on bail, a fact the learned Additional Government Advocate could not dispute.

¶9

Ratio / Principle

The bail application is allowed without any observation on the merits; the applicant is to be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount, subject to conditions (no tampering with evidence, no influencing witnesses, appearance on dates fixed, no inducement/threat/promise to dissuade disclosure), with liberty to the prosecution to seek cancellation on breach.

¶11

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail granted on parity with co-accused. Applicant Aameen, not named in the F.I.R. and allegedly shown with a planted recovery, in custody since 03.04.2022 in Case Crime No. 220 of 2022 under Sections 342, 394, 506, 411 IPC, Police Station Izzat Nagar, District Bareilly. Identically placed co-accused Aqeel @ Aqeela and Rajeev @ Arif had already been granted bail by the High Court vide orders dated 13.07.2022 and 29.07.2022 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 22469 of 2022 and 31173 of 2022; the Additional Government Advocate could not dispute that the case against the applicant was similar. Bail application allowed without observation on merits; release directed on personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount, subject to conditions against tampering with evidence, influencing witnesses, absence on fixed dates, and inducement or threat to any person acquainted with the facts, with liberty to the prosecution to move for cancellation on breach.

¶1

Court No. - 43

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 19970 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Aameen Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Anurag Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Mayank Kumar Jain,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Anurag Kumar Pandey, the learned counsel for the applicant, the learned Additional Government Advocate and perused the record.

¶6

The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 220 of 2022, under Sections 342, 394, 506, 411 IPC, Police Station Izzat Nagar, District Bareilly during pendency of the trial in the Court below.

¶7

The learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. It has further been submitted that applicant was not named in the F.I.R. It has further been submitted that alleged recovery shown from the possession of the applicant is false and planted by the police. It has further been submitted that identically placed co-accused Aqeel @ Aqeela and Rajeev @ Arif have already been granted bail by this court vide orders dated 13.07.2022 and 29.07.2022 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 22469 of 2022 and 31173 of 2022 respectively, and therefore, the applicant is also entitled to be released on bail on the ground of parity. It has further been submitted that criminal history of applicant has been explained in para-14 of the affidavit filed in support of the bail application. It has further been submitted that applicant is languishing in jail since 03.04.2022.

¶8

Per contra, the learned Additional Government Advocate has opposed the prayer for grant of bail but he could not dispute the fact that the case set up against the applicant is similar to that set up against the other co-accused persons, who have already been released on bail.

¶9

Keeping in view the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, I find it to be a fit case for grant of bail to the applicant in the aforesaid case.

¶10

In the light of preceding discussion and without making any observation on the merit of the case, the instant bail application is allowed .

¶11

Let the applicant Aameen be released on bail in Case Crime No. 220 of 2022, under Sections 342, 394, 506, 411 IPC, Police Station Izzat Nagar, District Bareilly, on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions:-

¶12

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶13

(ii) The applicant will not influence any witness.

¶14

(iii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶15

(iv) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶16

In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move an application before this Court seeking cancellation of the bail.

¶17

Order Date :- 18.8.2022 AKT

¶18

Digitally signed by ASHOK KUMAR TRIPATHI Date: 2022.08.22 10:57:54 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Aameen v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Aameen v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Salamat Shah Vs State of U.P.

Chandra Shrkhar Nagar Vs State of U.P.

Ramkrishna Pandey Vs State of U.P.

Jitendra Vs State of U.P.

Gulzar @ Kallu Vs State of U.P.

Shakeel Vs State of U.P.