This court allowed an anticipatory bail application. The court considered the nature of accusation, co-accused bail status, and lack of specific role for the applicant.
Application for anticipatory bail allowed subject to furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties and complying with specified 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.
Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:228989
Court No. - 78
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 8897 of 2023
Applicant :- Abdul Moid Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ramesh Chandra Yadav,Preeti Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J.
co-accused Irfan Solanki M.L.A. and Rizwan Solanki, who have already been granted bail. In alleged incident no one has sustained any injury. No specific role has been assigned to the applicant. It is further submitted that co-accused Shabbar Hussain has already been granted bail by this Court. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. The applicant undertakes to co-operate during investigation and trial and he would appear as and when required by the investigating agency or Court. It has been stated that in case, the applicant is granted anticipatory bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and would obey all conditions of bail.
facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on merit of the case, a case for anticipatory bail is made out.
(i) the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by the police as and when required;
(ii) 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/her/them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;
(iii) the applicant would co-operate during investigation and trial and would not misuse the liberty of bail.
Order Date :- 4.12.2023 Neeraj
Digitally signed by :- NEERAJ KUMAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
1 issue framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the applicant in the facts and circumstances of this case.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of MaharashtraReferred¶11
(2011) 1 SCC 694 · Who else cites this
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Abdul Moid
Raj Beer Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
