Allowed

Shakib v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC7 Jul 2022BAIL/20585/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed bail to the applicant in a Case Crime No. 90 of 2022 registered under Section 380 I.P.C. The applicant was accused of quashing unknown persons. The Court directed release on personal bond and two sureties with conditions against tampering or committing new crimes.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties subject to conditions of not tampering with evidence, cooperating in trial, and not committing new crimes.

Shakib Vs State of U.P. — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 78

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 20585 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Shakib Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sikandar Khan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J.

¶5

Supplementary affidavit has been filed today in Court, is taken on record.

¶6

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

¶7

The instant bail application has been filed with a prayer to release the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 90 of 2022, registered under Section 380 I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali Dehat, District Bulandshahar during pendency of the trial.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. The applicant is not named in the FIR as the FIR has been lodged against unknown person. He next argued that on information received from informer, the police personnel arrested the applicant. From joint possession of applicant and co-accused Rs.76,000/- and some ornaments have been recovered. There is no independent witness of the alleged recovery; in the instant case, no test identification parade was conducted. The applicant has no previous criminal history. The applicant is languishing in jail since 15.02.2022. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and co-operate in trial.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant.

¶10

Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the nature of offence, evidence, complicity of accused and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and the mandate laid down by Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 , the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶11

Let the applicant, Shakib, who is involved in the aforesaid case

¶12

crime, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶13

The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.

¶14

The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

¶15

The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶16

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶17

Order Date :- 7.7.2022 Nitin Verma

¶18

Digitally signed by NITIN KUMAR VERMA Date: 2022.07.08 15:33:09 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Shakib v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shakib 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

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Om Prakash Vishwakarma Vs State of U.P.

Chandra Prakash Vs State of U.P.

Bhanu Pratap Vs State of U.P.

Akhtar Husain Vs State of U.P.

Deependra Nithariya Vs State of U.P.

Zafruddeen Vs State of U.P.