Court allowed bail to Rahamtullah @ Daddu in a cheating case. Applicant was not in the FIR initially; added via co-accused statement with no evidence of fund withdrawal from him. Co-accounds already released on bail.
Released on bail by furnishing personal bond and two sureties each in like amount subject to standard conditions.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 75
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7270 of 2022
Applicant :- Rahamtullah @ Daddu Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rajesh Kumar Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.
It is submitted that applicant was not named in the F.I.R. which has been lodged after delay of 47 days from the said incident. Applicant has been roped in this case on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused Gyasuddin Khan. Neither he has withdrawn any amount from the account of informant nor any recovery has been made from the possession of this applicant. It is further submitted that co-accused Rishi Kumar, Km. Jinat, Anup Singh & Ram Kumar Srivastava have already been enlarged on bail by this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos.5618 of 2022, 6603 of 2022, 52758 of 2021 & 981 of 2022 vide orders dated 21.02.2022, 24.02.2022, 22.02.2022 & 31.01.2022 respectively. The case of this applicant stands on similar footing to that of co-accused. Applicant is languishing in jail since 11.09.2021 and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the fact that co-accused persons have already been granted bail and the case of the present applicant is on similar footing and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a fit case for bail. The bail application is allowed.
Let the applicant Rahamtullah @ Daddu involved in Case Crime No.437 of 2021, under Section 420 I.P.C. & 66D Information Technology Act, Police Station Babugarh, District Hapur, 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.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.
Order Date :- 5.3.2022 Ashok Gupta
Digitally signed by ASHOK KUMAR GUPTA Date: 2022.03.07 17:57:37 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to bail on account of not being named in the FIR initially and being added based solely on a co-accused's confessional statement.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Rahamtullah @ Daddu
State of U.P.
Subhash Chandra Sharma
Ashok Gupta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
