Allowed

Arman v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC28 Jan 2022BAIL/45365/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Hon'ble Ram Krishna Gautam, J. allowed a bail application filed by Arman against the State of U.P. in a case involving IPC Sections 363, 366, 368, 328, 344, 34, and 504. The court noted the existence of a prima facie case due to the applicant's innocence and lack of criminal antecedents.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail upon executing personal bond and two reliable sureties in the conditioned amount.

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

¶1

hgCourt No. - 64

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 45365 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Arman Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Vijay Kumar Dwivedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ram Krishna Gautam,J.

¶5

Heard over bail application moved by applicant, Arman, in Case Crime No. 471 of 2021, under Sections- 363, 366, 368, 328, 344, 34, 504 I.P.C., P.S. Kwarsi, District- Aligarh.

¶6

Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the accusedapplicant is innocent; he has been falsely implicated in this very case crime number and is languishing in jail since 16.8.2021; he is of no criminal antecedent and there is no likelihood of fleeing from course of justice or tempering with evidence in case of release on bail; he was neither named in first information report nor was said with any accusation in statement recorded under Section 161 of Cr.P.C.; prosecutrix was held to be of 18 years in medical age determination by Medical Board and she had said to be voluntarily married with Afjal; subsequently, in statement under Section 164 of Cr.P.C., story was developed that wife of applicant did administer some sedative liquor to prosecutrix and applicant used force in solemnizing marriage with Afjal; it is a false implication. Hence, bail has been prayed for.

¶7

Learned AGA has vehemently opposed, but could not oppose this fact that neither accusation of enticing or taking is against applicant nor of administrating sedative liquor is against applicant.

¶8

Having heard learned counsels for both sides and gone through materials placed on record as well as considering all above facts and circumstances, the nature of accusations, severity of the punishment in the case of conviction and nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tampering with the witness and prima facie case, but, without commenting on merits of the case, a case for bail is made out.

¶9

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

¶10

Let the applicant, Arman , involved in above mentioned case crime number be released on bail, on his executing a personal bond and two reliable sureties, each, in the like amount, to the

¶11

satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions:

¶12

The applicant will not tamper with the evidence.

¶13

The applicant will not indulge in any criminal activity.

¶14

The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and co-operate in the trial.

¶15

The applicant will appear regularly on each and every date fixed by the trial court, unless his personal appearance is exempted through counsel by the court concerned.

¶16

The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court, Allahabad.

¶17

The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by counsel of the party concerned.

¶18

The concerned Court/ Authority/ Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court, Allahabad, and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.

¶19

In the event of breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the court below will be at liberty to proceed to cancel his bail.

¶20

Order Date :- 28.1.2022 Kamarjahan

Arman v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arman 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

Praveen @ Praveen Vs State of U.P.

Shah Alam Vs State of U.P.

Aarif @ Kallu Vs State of U.P. through Secretary Home at Lucknow

Vinod Yadav @ Alok Vs State of U.P.

Sanju Saini Vs State of U.P.

Arvind Vs State of U.P.