Allowed

Farman v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC28 Aug 2023BAIL/21797/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court allowed a bail application by Farman, who was accused of steel cutting alleged to be part of a fake encounter. The court noted arguments regarding a fake encounter and planted evidence without deciding on substantive merits and imposed standard bail conditions.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail on personal bond and two sureties in like amount with conditions regarding tampering with evidence and appearance in court.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:173531

¶2

Court No. - 66

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 21797 of 2023 Applicant :- Farman Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Surendra Narayan Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.

¶5

By means of the the bail application the applicant has prayed to be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No. 297 of 2020 at Police Station- Sadar Bazar, District- Saharanpur under Sections 457, 458, 461, 380, 411 IPC. The applicant is in jail since 28.06.2020.

¶6

The bail application of the applicant was rejected by the learned trial court on 12.10.2020.

¶7

The following arguments made by Shri Surendra Narayan Mishra, learned counsel on behalf of the applicant, which could not be satisfactorily refuted by Shri Rishi Chaddha, learned AGA from the record, entitle the applicant for grant of bail:

¶8

(1). The applicant was nominated in this case after he was arrested in a fake encounter staged by the police authorities to burnish their credentials.

¶9

(2). No one from the police has suffered life threatening injury.

¶10

(3). The recovered items were planted on the applicant to implicate him in this case to burnish the credentials of the

¶11

police investigators.

¶12

(4). There is no independent witness to the recovery.

¶13

(5). Recovered articles cannot be linked with the crime.

¶14

(6). Prosecution evidence does not connect the applicant with the offence.

¶15

(7). Learned counsel for the applicant claims congruency in role and seeks parity in relief granted to co-accused namely Gulsher @ Kala @ Ballu, Saddiq, Ikram, Rukma @ Rukadin, Shamshuddin @ Samshu, Jabir and Jishan who have been granted bail by this Court on 27.04.2022 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 2384 of 2021, order dated 10.12.2020 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 41636 of 2020, order dated 26.07.2021 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 39790 of 2020, order dated 22.01.2021 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 44484 of 2020, order dated 14.12.2020 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 45734 of 2020, order dated 15.12.2020 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 46106 of 2020 and order dated 04.01.2021 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 48059 of 2020 respectively.

¶16

(8). The applicant has explained his criminal history. It is also contended that the applicant is a soft target and a convenient scapegoat for the police authorities. It is also contended by learned amicus curiae that the from the records available with the AGA as well as from the

¶17

instructions the applicant has been falsely implicated in the said case only to show their professional credentials. The said criminal case does not have any bearing on the instant bail application.

¶18

(9). The applicant is not a flight risk. The applicant being a law abiding citizen has always cooperated with the investigation and undertakes to cooperate with the court proceedings. There is no possibility of his influencing witnesses, tampering with the evidence or reoffending.

¶19

In the light of the preceding discussion and without making any observations on the merits of the case, the bail application is allowed.

¶20

Let the applicant- Farman be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number, on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below. The following conditions be imposed in the interest of justice:-ion is directed

¶21

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence or influence any witness during the trial.

¶22

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

¶23

Order Date :- 28.8.2023 Pravin

¶24

Digitally signed by :- PRAVIN VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Farman v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Farman 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

Raju Vs State of U.P.

Virendra Kumar Alka Vs State of U.P.

Aamir Vs State of U.P.

Charan Singh Vs State of U.P.

Upendra Vs State of U.P.

Viri Singh Vs State of U.P.