Allowed

Furkan v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC19 Sept 2023BAIL/13478/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Judicature at Allahabad granted bail to the applicant in a criminal trial involving IPC and Arms Act charges, noting no recovery of incriminating articles was made against him and no specific risk of tampering was established by the state.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties with conditions to appear, not tamper with evidence or witnesses, and not leave the district.

Furkan Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:181094

¶2

Court No. - 74

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 13478 of 2022

¶4

Applicant :- Furkan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rakesh Kumar Verma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

¶6

Heard counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State-opposite party.

¶7

The instant bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. has been filed with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 217 of 2021 under Sections 457, 382, 411, 307, 34 I.P.C. and Section 3/25 & 4/25 of the Arms Act, Police Station- Bhagatpur, District- Moradabad, during the pendency of the trial.

¶8

Counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case owing to certain other disputes between the parties. The applicant and the informant are residents of the same village. No recovery of any incriminating article has been made from the applicant. There is no independent witness to the alleged recovery. In the alleged incident, the applicant has also received injury. The criminal history of the applicant has been explained in para no. 4 of the supplementary affidavit. The applicant is in jail since 07.09.2021. In case he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.

¶10

Having heard counsel for the parties and having perused the record this Court prima facie finds that no recovery of any incriminating article has been made from the applicant. There is no independent witness to the alleged recovery. Further, the applicant has remained confined for more than two years, more so when no reasonable apprehension has been brought to the fore by the State that the applicant, if enlarged on bail, would either tamper with the evidence or delay the trial or intimidate the witness, without commenting on merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶11

Let the applicant- Furkan, involved in the aforesaid case be

¶12

released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties (in view of criminal history) each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to conditions that he:

¶13

(i) shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court;

¶14

(ii) shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence;

¶15

(iii) shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses; and,

¶16

(iv) shall not leave district without the leave of the trial court.

¶17

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

¶18

Order Date :- 19.9.2023 Sachin Mishra

¶19

Digitally signed by :- SACHIN MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Furkan v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Furkan 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sonu Vs State of U.P.

Shahabuddin Vs State of U.P.

Shivcharan Vs State of U.P.

Sheshmani Harizan Vs State of U.P.

Rakesh Raka Vs State of U.P.

Anoop Kumar Singh @ Prempal Vs State of U.P.