Allowed

Vijay v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC5 Jan 2023BAIL/54675/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed bail to the applicant, Vijay, who was in jail since September 2022 in a case involving sections 392 and 411 IPC. The application, rejected earlier, was permitted based on arguments regarding planted evidence and lack of prosecution connection.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount with conditions not to tamper with evidence or witnesses and to appear in court.

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

¶1

Court No. - 74

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 54675 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Vijay Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mohd Nazam,Jamaluddin Mohd. Nasir 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. 360 of 2022 at Police StationBudhana, District- Muzaffar Nagar under Sections 392, 411 IPC. The applicant is in jail since 07.09.2022.

¶6

The bail application of the applicant was rejected by the learned trial court on 21.10.2022.

¶7

The following arguments made by Shri Jamaluddin, 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). One country made pistol, one live cartridge, one mobile phone and Rs. 1500/cash has been shown as recovered from the applicant. The money belongs to the applicant.

¶9

(2). Recovered items were planted on the person of the applicant to frame him in the instant case to show proficiency of the police

¶10

investigators.

¶11

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

¶12

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

¶13

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

¶14

(6). Explaining the criminal history of the applicant it is contended that the applicant belongs to poor economic strata of the society and is a convenient scapegoat for the police authorities. The applicant has been falsely nominated in the said cases only to burnish the credentials of the police authorities. The said cases do not depict commission of any heinous offence and have no bearing on the instant bail application.

¶15

(7). 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.

¶16

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

¶17

Let the applicant- Vijay 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

¶18

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

¶19

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

¶20

Order Date :- 5.1.2023 Pravin

¶21

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

Vijay v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vijay 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

Arun Singh Vs State of U.P.

Rakesh Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Kallu @ Rashid Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Mool Chandra Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Nand Kishore Vs State of U.P.

Smt. Billo Vs State of U.P.