Allowed

Waseem Ahmad v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC29 Nov 2023BAIL/47978/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Hon'ble Umesh Chandra Sharma, J., allowed bail to the applicant in a case under the UP Gangsters Act. The court relied on the applicant's assertions regarding false implication and noted the inability of the State to dispute substantive submissions without commenting on merits.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount subject to standard conditions.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:225084

¶2

Court No. - 75

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 47978 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Waseem Ahmad Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Swetashwa Agarwal,Subir Lal Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Umesh Chandra Sharma,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Swetashwa Agarwal, learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶7

The instant bail application has been filed with a prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.293 of 2020, under Section 2/3 UP Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station Manjhanpur, District Kaushambi, during the pendency of trial.

¶8

It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the prosecution under the Gangsters Act has been launched against the applicant on the basis of four cases, triable by the Magistrate, shown in the gang chart in which he has been enlarged on bail which has been explained in paragraph-12 of the affidavit filed in support of the bail application. It is further contended that apart from the cases shown in the gang chart, there are criminal history of six more cases against the applicant which has also been explained in paragraph-13 of the said affidavit. It is also contended that his miseries started when he filed a complaint against Dr. Arup Benarjee and subsequently the SHO, Manjhanpur, District Kaushambi has also been implicated thereafter he was badly beaten by the said SHO without any reason, therefore, it can be said that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case due to police rivalry. He is not the member of any gang. There is no independent witness against him. There is no likelihood of his abscondence or tampering with the evidence. The applicant is languishing in jail since 18.05.2023. In case the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty.

¶9

Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions advanced by the counsel for the applicant.

¶10

Having regard to the facts, circumstances and the

¶11

submissions made but without commenting on merits of the case, this Court is of opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

¶12

Let the applicant - Waseem Ahmad, involved in the aforesaid case crime 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;

¶14

(ii) shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence;

¶15

(iii) shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses.

¶16

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

¶17

Order Date :- 29.11.2023 Shahroz

¶18

Digitally signed by :- SHAHROJ ALAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Waseem Ahmad v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Waseem 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nausad Vs State of U.P.

Aabid Vs State of U.P.

Sunil Kumar Gupta @ Rajkumar Gupta Vs State of U.P.

Smt Mamta @ Bhoori Vs State of U.P.

Niranjan Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Rahul Vs State of U.P.