Allowed

Rafeek Ahmad v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC2 Dec 2023BAIL/44292/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This High Court allowed a bail application for the applicant, Rafeek Ahmad, accused in a police encounter under IPC Sections 147, 148, 149, and 307. The court dismissed the State's opposition, noting no reasonable apprehension of tampering with evidence and granting bail to co-accused, thus awarding parity. Bail was granted subject to conditions including appearance and non-tampering.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties in a like amount.

Rafeek Ahmad Vs State of U.P. — Arbitration | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:228089

¶2

Court No. - 75

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 44292 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Rafeek Ahmad Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Shahid Karim Siddiqui,Mohd. Arif Siddiqui Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Umesh Chandra Sharma,J.

¶6

Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶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. 473 of 2022 under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307 I.P.C., Police Station- Kankarkhera, District- Meerut, during the pendency of the trial.

¶8

Counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is a case of police encounter where no police personnel has received any injury. There is no independent witness of he alleged recovery or the arrest of the applicant. The applicant himself has received gun shot injury. The applicant claims parity. It is next contended that coaccused Jagat Singh, Ram Prakash @ Lala, Prince, Manish, Ishwar, Imran, Aman, Arshad, Ibrar and Vakeel have been granted bail by this Court and the applicant also claims parity. The criminal history of the applicant has been explained in para 5 of the affidavit. The applicant is in jail since 06.07.2022, 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 regard to the submissions made above and the fact that the applicant has remained confined for almost two years and the co-accused have been enlarged on bail more so when no reasonable apprehension has been brought to the fore by the State that the applicant, if enlarged on bail, would either temper with the

¶11

evidence or delay the trial or intimidate the witness, without commenting on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶12

Let the applicant- Rafeek Ahmad , involved in aforesaid case be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the conditions that he:

¶13

(i) shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court; (ii) shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; (iii) shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses.

¶14

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

¶15

Order Date :- 2.12.2023

¶16

S.Verma

¶17

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

Rafeek Ahmad v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rafeek Ahmad 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

Babu Vs State of U.P.

Nitesh Vs State of U.P.

Bhura and Another Vs State of U.P.

Amaan @ Landi Vs State of U.P.

Anmol Singh Vs State of U.P.

Akash Bharti Vs State of U.P.