Allowed

Sirazus v. State of U.P. though it Principal Secretary (Home)

Allahabad HC19 Dec 2022BAIL/58000/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This bail application was heard in the Allahabad High Court regarding a case of snatching under the Indian Penal Code. The applicant, Sirazus, sought bail claiming innocence and parity with a co-accused. The court allowed the bail application, imposing standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

The applicant Sirazus is released on bail upon executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties.

Sirazus Vs State of U.P. though it Principal Secretary… — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 93

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 58000 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Sirazus

¶4

Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Though It Principal Secretary (Home) Counsel for Applicant :- Atul Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Surendra Singh-I,J.

¶6

Learned counsel for the appellant has filed today a status report relating to the bail order of co-accused Rashid. It is taken on record.

¶7

This is an application for bail on behalf of the applicant Sirazus in Case Crime No. 426 of 2022, under Sections 392, 411 IPC, Police Station Civil Line, District Muzaffar Nagar.

¶8

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and the learned A.G.A. appearing for the State.

¶9

The prosecution story in brief is that on 17.11.2022 at 19.15 hours when informant Piyush Kumar Garg was going with his wife on motorcycle to attend a birthday party, two accused came from behind on a motorcycle and snatching the golden chain, weight 20 gm, of his wife and ran away. On 29.11.2022 at 14.18 hrs the police party on the basis of information received from the informer arrested the accused applicant and co-accused Rashid. From the right pocket of the lower of applicant a yellow metal-chain was recovered. On being questioned by the police, the accused applicant and co-accused have uttered in one voice that they have snatched this chain of informant's wife two day's ago.

¶10

The submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is that he is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present crime. It is submitted that nothing incriminating was recovered from his possession. It is further submitted that the applicant is neither named in the FIR nor he was arrested on the spot. The

¶11

recovery allegedly shown the applicant is bogus and false. The applicant has no criminal antecedents to his credit. It is also submitted that co-accused Rashid, similarly circumstanced as the applicant, has already been enlarged on bail by another coordinate bench of this Court vide order dated 14.12.2022 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 56971 of 2022. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail on the ground of parity. It is in the last submitted that the applicant is in jail since 19.11.2022 and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶12

Learned A.G.A. appearing on behalf of the State has vehementally opposed the prayer for bail but could not deny the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶13

Considering the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of allegations, the gravity of the offence, the severity of punishment, the evidence appearing in the case, in particular, the fact that co-accused Rashid has already been enlarged on bail, but without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of opinion that the applicant is entitled to bail.

¶14

The bail application, accordingly, stands allowed .

¶15

Let the applicant Sirazus involved in the aforementioned case be released on bail on executing his personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:

¶16

i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.

¶17

ii) The applicant shall not threaten or harass the prosecution witnesses.

¶18

iii) The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court.

¶19

iv) The applicant shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which the applicant is accused, or suspected of the commission.

¶20

v) 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 such person from disclosing facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶21

In case of default of any of the conditions enumerated above, the complainant would be free to move an application for cancellation of bail before the Court concerned.

¶22

Order Date :- 19.12.2022 Brijesh Maurya

¶23

Digitally signed by BRIJESH KUMAR Date: 2022.12.20 09:38:58 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sirazus v. State of U.P. though it Principal Secretary (Home)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sirazus v. State of U.P. though it Principal Secretary (Home)

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

Vinesh Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Pappu Vs State of U.P.

Hari Ram Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Mukesh Kumar Keshari Vs State of U.P. and Another

Dharmendra Vs State of U.P.

Bittu Jaysawal Vs State of U.P.