Allowed

Tabrez v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC29 Nov 2023BAIL/44339/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an application under Section 439 Cr.P.C., this court granted bail to the accused who was not named in the FIR and suffered for over three and a half months in custody. The court found no apprehension of evidence tampering or witness intimidation justifying the refusal of bail.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail with personal bond and two sureties on furnishing of conditions to appear and not tamper with evidence.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:225537

¶2

Court No. - 74

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 44339 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Tabrez Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Jata Shankar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

¶6

Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Neeraj Kumar Sharma, learned A.G.A. for the State-opposite party.

¶8

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. 385 of 2023, under Sections 307, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Surajpur, District Gautam Buddha Nagar during the pendency of the trial.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant was not named in the first information report and has been falsely implicated in the instant case. The name of the applicant was disclosed by the injured in his statement to the police. In the said statement role of catching hold has been assigned to the applicant, whereas co-accused Jitendra is alleged to have inflicted injury on the injured. The role of the applicant is clearly distinguishable to that of the named co-accused Jitendra. The criminal history of the applicant has been explained in Paragraphs- 4 and 5 of the supplementary affidavit. The applicant is in jail since 07.08.2023 and if he is released on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty.

¶10

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

¶11

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of the record, this Court prima facie finds that the applicant was not named in the first information report. In the statement of injured the role of catching hold has been assigned to the applicant. Moreover, the applicant has remained confined for more

¶12

than three and half months and after submission of the chargesheet there is no hope of early conclusion of trial, and 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, therefore, without commenting on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶13

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

¶14

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

¶15

(ii) shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; and,

¶16

(iii) shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses.

¶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 :- 29.11.2023 SKT/-

¶19

Digitally signed by :- SHIVA KANT TIWARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Tabrez v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tabrez 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

Chhattarpal Vs State of U.P.

Babi Chaudhari @ Ankit Sharma Vs State of U.P.

Neeraj Kumar Dubey Vs State of U.P.

Lekhpal Vs State of Up through Princi. Secre. Home Gov. Of Up at and 3ors

Sanoj Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Mohd. Ahmad Vs State of U.P.