Allowed

Mustkim v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC16 Oct 2023BAIL/43841/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed bail to the applicant in a criminal case involving rioting and assault charges. Considering the applicant's lack of criminal history and the submissions made, the Court granted bail subject to conditions preventing tampering with evidence and ensuring court appearance.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties subject to standard bail conditions.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:199769

¶2

Court No. - 72

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 43841 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Mustkim Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sunil Kumar Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶6

List has been revised.

¶7

Heard Sri Sunil Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri V.K.S. Parmar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶8

Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 0156 of 2023, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 307, 504 of I.P.C., Section 7 of Criminal Law Amendment Act and Sections 3/25/27 of Arms Act, Police Station Bahsuma, District Meerut, during the pendency of trial.

¶9

As per prosecution story, two rival groups were found involved in brick batting and arsoning by police on 17.09.2023 and in all five persons were injured from one side and three from other side.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. He has nothing to do with the said offence as alleged in the FIR. Learned counsel has further stated that no FIR has been instituted by either parties.

¶11

Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicant to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against him. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicant have also been touched upon at length. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 17.09.2023. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶12

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant and also the fact that the applicant has no criminal history.

¶13

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, pending trial and considering the complicity of accused, severity of punishment, at this stage, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed .

¶14

Let the applicant- Mustkim, involved in aforementioned case crime number be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned

¶15

subject to following conditions.

¶16

i. The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶17

ii. The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶18

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

¶19

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

¶20

v. 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 from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶21

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

¶22

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

¶23

It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion on the testimony of the witnesses.

¶24

(Justice Krishan Pahal)

¶25

Order Date :- 16.10.2023 Siddhant

¶26

Digitally signed by :- SIDDHANT SAHU High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Mustkim v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mustkim 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

Sachin Vs State of U.P.

Rakesh Mittal @ Rakesh Kumar Mittal Vs State of U.P.

Kuddus and Another Vs State of U.P.

Mahtab Alam Vs State of U.P.

Dashrath and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Babu Khan Vs State of U.P.