Allowed

Imanuddin v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC5 Jan 2022BAIL/37775/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Application for bail under Sections 363, 366 and 120B IPC against kidnapping and abetting. Court granted bail on personal bond and two sureties after noting prolonged detention and pending investigation against absconding main accused, imposing strict conditions on witness tampering and court attendance.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail with personal bond and two sureties subject to order conditions including prohibition of witness tampering and abiding by summons.

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

¶1

Court No. - 46

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 37775 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Imanuddin Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Veer Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Mrs. Sunita Agarwal,J.

¶5

Order on (Second) Bail Application

¶6

Heard Sri Veer Singh learned Advocate for the applicant.

¶7

It is pointed out that the investigation in Case Crime No. 282 of 2019, under Sections 363, 366 & 120B I.P.C., Police Station Heempur Deepa, District Bijnor has been completed and a charge sheet has been submitted against the applicant on 12.5.2020.

¶8

The contention of the learned counsel for the applicant is that the charge sheet has been submitted by the Investigating Officer in a hurried manner without collection of proper cogent evidence so as to bring home the guilt of the applicant in the alleged crime.

¶9

It is then argued that the main accused namely Nadeem @ Kallu is still absconding and whereabout of the victim girl could not be known. The applicant has been implicated being brother-in-law of the main accused on the premise that he had helped in kidnapping of the victim girl.

¶10

Learned A.G.A., on the basis of the instructions received by him, submits that the Investigating Officer has not been able to lay his hand on the main accused Nadeem @ Kallu and as such victim girl could not be recovered so far.

¶11

As regards the role of the applicant herein, it is admitted that the statements in the case diary also indicate that he had been accused of the act of abetting the crime alleged.

¶12

It may be noteworthy that the applicant is in jail since 13th February, 2020, i.e. approximately for a period of two years and the investigation in the crime against the main accused has not been concluded as yet.

¶13

Be that as it may, looking to the material on record, without

¶14

commenting on the merits of the case, this Court finds that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶15

Let applicant- Imanuddin be released on bail in the Case Crime No. 282 of 2019, under Sections 363, 366 & 120B I.P.C., Police Station Heempur Deepa, District Bijnor on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following additional conditions, which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶16

(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses;

¶17

(ii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law;

¶18

(iii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code;

¶19

(iv) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code; and

¶20

(v) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶21

Order Date :- 5.1.2022 Brijesh

Imanuddin v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Imanuddin 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jitendra Yadav Vs Banwari Singh Yadav

Saud Vs State of U.P.

Ramraj Kol Vs State of U.P.

Smt. Maya Gautam Vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt. Suman Agarwal Vs State of U.P. and Another

Gauri Shankar Garg Vs State of U.P. and Another