Allowed

Sameer Mirja @ Munna @ Ganja @ Ram Bhai v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC24 Mar 2022BAIL/828/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal bail application, the Allahabad High Court granted bail to the applicant charged under sections 380, 411, and 457 of the IPC. The court observed that identically placed co-accused had been released on bail, leading to the conclusion that the applicant had made out a case for bail.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail with a personal bond and two sureties subject to specific conditions.

Sameer Mirja @ Munna @ Ganja @ Ram Bhai Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 79

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 828 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Sameer Mirja @ Munna @ Ganja @ Ram Bhai Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Vikash Chandra Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Mohd. Faiz Alam Khan,J.

¶5

Heard Shri Ashish Kumar Dwivedi, Advocate holding brief of Shri Vikash Chandra Tiwari, learned counsel for the accusedapplicant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶6

This bail application has been moved by the accused/applicant- Sameer Mirja @ Munna @ Ganja @ Ram Bhai for grant of bail, in Case Crime No.18 of 2021, under Sections 380, 411, 457 I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali, District Agra, during trial.

¶7

Learned counsel for the accused-applicant while pressing the bail application submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case and he has not committed any offence as claimed by the prosecution.

¶8

It is further submitted that the applicant was not named in the first information report. After three months of the incident, the applicant is shown to have been arrested and Rs.7,000/- is shown to have been recovered from his possession and by the arrest of the applicant in the instant case, seven other criminal cases have been slapped against him.

¶9

It is vehemently submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the recovered amount of Rs.7,000/- has never been identified by the informant and without there being any evidence applicant with his arrest in instant case has been involved in 7 other criminal cases. It is also submitted that similarly placed co-accused namely Saleem @ Raja and Saif Ali @ Sarif have been granted bail by the subordinate court, but the prayer of bail of the applicant has been rejected only on account of his criminal history.

¶10

It is next submitted that the criminal history of 13 cases have been shown against the applicant, however, 7 cases have been slapped against the applicant by his arrest in the instant case and in the remaining 6 cases, the applicant has been released on bail, however, out of 7 cases slapped with the arrest of the

¶11

applicant in the instant case, in 2 of such cases pertaining to Case Crime No.15 of 2021 and 16 of 2021, the applicant has also been released on bail and copy of these bail orders have been placed at page 10 and 13 of the supplementary affidavit dated 16.02.2022.

¶12

It is next submitted that applicant is in jail in this case since 02.06.2021, charge-sheet in this case has already been submitted and there is no apprehension that after being released on bail the applicant may flee from the course of law or may otherwise misuse the liberty.

¶13

Learned A.G.A., however, opposes the prayer of bail of the applicant on the ground that the applicant has committed heinous offence and having regard to the manner in which the crime has been committed, he is not entitled to be released on bail but could not controvert the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant with regard to the fact that identically placed co-accused persons i.e. Saleem @ Raja and Saif Ali @ Sarif have been granted bail by the subordinate courts.

¶14

Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the considered view that applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is thus allowed .

¶15

Let the accused/applicant- Sameer Mirja @ Munna @ Ganja @ Ram Bhai involved in above-mentioned case, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:-

¶16

(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.

¶17

(ii) The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

¶18

(iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶19

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶20

Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the Court concerned before the bonds are

¶21

accepted.

¶22

Observations made herein-above by this court are only for the purpose of disposal of this bail application and shall not be construed as an expression on the merits of the case.

¶23

Order Date :- 24.3.2022 Anupam S/-

¶24

Digitally signed by ANUPAM SINGH PATEL Date: 2022.03.24 17:02:07 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sameer Mirja @ Munna @ Ganja @ Ram Bhai v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sameer Mirja @ Munna @ Ganja @ Ram Bhai 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

Meenu Sain Vs State of U.P.

Irfan Vs State of U.P.

Avinash Bajpai Alias Akash Bajpai Vs State of U.P.

Ranjeet Gaur Vs State of U.P.

Hanuman Sevak Pandey Vs State of U.P. and Another

Dhananjay Singh Vs State of U.P.