Allowed

Jakir v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC21 Jun 2022BAIL/24494/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a bail application filed by Jakir under the Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act. The court noted he was not named in the FIR, no incriminating articles were recovered, and witness statements were based on hearsay. Bail was granted on a bond with conditions.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail on furnishing personal bond and two sureties each in like amount subject to conditions.

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

¶1

Court No. - 47

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 24494 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Jakir Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sandeep Kumar Yadav,Rajesh Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Sandeep Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Arvind Kumar, learned Standing Counsel for the State and perused the record of the case.

¶6

By way of present application the applicant made a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No.124 of 2022, under Sections 3/5/8 Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act, Police Station Nebua Naurangia, District Kushi Nagar during the pendency of trial.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant was neither named in the FIR nor any inciminating article has been recovered from his possession. He further submitted that his complexity surfaced in the case in the statement of the witnesses during investigation and except these statements there is nothing on record against the applicant and perusal of the statements also do not show his complexity in the present case as the alleged independent witnesses only alleged that they have heard the applicant and other co-accused person that they have slaughtered calf. It is further submitted that applicant is having no criminal history and is in jail since 4.5.2022. Therefore, the applicant may be released on bail.

¶8

Per contra, learned A.G.A. for the State opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant but could not dispute the fact that the applicant was neither named in the FIR nor any incriminating material has been recovered from his possession and further the statement of the independent witnesses also shows that they have only heard that applicant and other accused person had slaughtered the calf.

¶9

I have heard both the parties and perused the record of the case.

¶10

From perusal of the FIR it appears that the applicant is not named in the FIR and no recovery was made from his possession and FIR was lodged against unknown person and his complexity surfaced in the present case during investigation at

¶11

later stage through statement of witnesses namely, Amit Tiwari and Akhilesh. Perusal of the record shows that both the witnesses made allegations against the applicant on the basis of the conversation of the applicant and other co-accused.

¶12

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused and submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the opinion that the applicant has made out a case for bail. Hence, the bail application is hereby allowed.

¶13

Let the applicant- Jakir be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions, which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶14

(i) That the applicant shall cooperate in the expeditious disposal of the trial and shall regularly attend the court unless inevitable.

¶15

(ii) That the applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any 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 or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (iii) That after his release, the applicant shall not involve in any criminal activity.

¶16

(iv) The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned.

¶17

In case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

¶18

It is clarified that anything said in this order is limited to the purpose of determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. The trial court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led unaffected by anything said in this order.

¶19

Order Date :- 21.6.2022 Deepika

¶20

Digitally signed by DEEPIKA SINGH Date: 2022.06.23 13:56:39 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Jakir v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jakir 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

Ritik Lakhera Vs State of U.P.

Om Prakash Singh Vs State of U.P.

Narsingh Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Rahul Vs State of U.P.

Ramakant Sharma Vs State of U.P.

Munendra Vs State of U.P.