Allowed

Safeeq @ Sarik v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC22 Mar 2022BAIL/765/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Application for bail allowed under Section 438 CrPC. Applicant falsely implicated in theft of jewellery, mobile, and cash; one article recovered wrongly. Co-accused already on bail. Granted bail subject to standard conditions including furnishing bond and sureties.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail by furnishing personal bond and two sureties subject to standard conditions.

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

¶1

Court No. - 75

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 765 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Safeeq @ Sarik Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ansar Ahmad Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.

¶6

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that he is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. F.I.R. was lodged against unknown persons for theft of jewellery, mobile phone and Rs. 10,000/-. During investigation, the name of applicant was brought into light by showing false recovery of Rs. 4670/-. Further submitted that co-accused Shaheed has already been granted bail by coordinate Bench of this Court on 9.2.2022 through Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 3256 of 2022, since the role of the applicant is not distinguishable with the role of co-accused, the applicant is also entitled for bail. Criminal history against the applicant has been explained through supplementary affidavit. He is languishing in jail since 28.6.2021 and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.

¶7

Learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail.

¶8

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the fact that co-accused person has 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.

¶9

Let the applicant Safeeq @ Sarik involved in Case Crime No. 26 of 2021, under Sections 392, 411 I.P.C., P.S. G.R.P., District Etawah be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions.

¶10

The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶11

The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶12

The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶13

The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected of the commission of which he is suspected.

¶14

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.

¶15

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.

¶16

Order Date :- 22.3.2022 A. Singh

¶17

Digitally signed by ANURAG SINGH Date: 2022.03.23 16:42:55 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Safeeq @ Sarik v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Safeeq @ Sarik 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

Lavkush Pandey Vs State of U.P

Lavkush Pandey Vs State of U.P.

Bantu Vs State of Up.

Arjun Vs State of U.P.

Rajeev Vs State of U.P.

Kaushal Kishor Vs State of U.P.