Rahees v. State of U.P.
Case brief
What is this about?
Court allowed bail in a theft case alleging planted evidence and lack of prior naming in the FIR. Applicant granted release on personal bond and two sureties subject to standard conditions.
What did the court decide?
Release on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties in the like amount with conditions to appear in trial court, not interfere with witnesses, and refrain from criminal activities.
What the court decided
Court No. - 88
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11387 of 2023
Applicant :- Rahees Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Hemant Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.
Supplementary affidavit filed today on behalf of the applicant, is taken on record.
Heard Sri Hemant Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Ravi Kant Kushwaha, learned AGA for the State.
The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 157 of 2022, under Sections 411, 413, 379 and 34 IPC, Police Station Civil Lines, District- Meerut during pendency of the trial in the court below.
FIR of the present case was lodged under Section 379 IPC against unknown person and according to the FIR, mobile phone of the informant was stolen from her bag.
Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant was not named in the first information report and during investigation his complicity was revealed and it is alleged that he was arrested along with other co-accused person and from the possession of applicant total 14 mobile phones were recovered including the mobile phone of informant of the present matter but entire recovery is totally false and planted one and in fact nothing incriminating was recovered from the possession of applicant. He further submitted that as applicant is having criminal history of ten other cases, therefore, only due to his long criminal history, he was implicated by the police in the present matter only to solve the present theft. He next submitted that he has explained the criminal history of applicant in para no. 10 to the affidavit filed in support of the present bail application and in the present matter he is in jail since 26.04.2022.
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to bail when not named in the FIR but implicated during investigation, with alleged recovered evidence being planted.
Whether the applicant's criminal history is relevant to the question of bail while he has been in detention for over one year.
Parties & counsel
- applicant
Rahees
Coram
Sameer Jain
Aditya
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Allahabad HC
- Decided on
- · April
- Registered
- Case no.
- BAIL/11387/2023
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court