Allowed

Mohd Khawaja Siddiki v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC23 Jan 2023BAIL/55525/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot, J. allowed a bail application filed by Mohd Khawaja Siddiki in Case Crime No.209 of 2020 under Sections 447, 448, 441, and others IPC, correcting the text of the application which mentioned Section 323. The court described the case as a petty neighbourhood dispute involving a 75-year-old applicant and passed the order without making observations on the merits.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail by personal bond and two sureties with conditions against tampering with evidence and ensuring appearance.

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

¶1

Court No. - 74 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 55525 of 2022

¶2

Applicant :- Mohd Khawaja Siddiki Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Punya Sheel Pandey,Brat Sheel Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Mohd.Sartaz Ahmad Siddiqui,Mumtaz Ahmad Siddiqui

¶3

Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.

¶4

By means of the the bail application the applicant has prayed to be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No.209 of 2020 at Police Station-Atarsuiya District-Prayagraj under Sections 447, 448, 323, 504, 324, 325, 307, 308, 326 I.P.C. The applicant is in jail since 23.09.2020.

¶5

The bail application of the applicant was rejected by the learned trial court on 17.02.2021.

¶6

The following arguments made by Shri Punya Sheel Pandey, learned counsel on behalf of the applicant, which could not be satisfactorily refuted by Shri Mumtaz Ahmad Siddiqui, learned counsel for the informant and Shri Chandan Agrawal, learned AGA from the record, entitle the applicant for grant of bail:

¶7

(1).The F.I.R. is a fall out of a petty neighbourhood dispute.

¶8

(2). The F.I.R. assigns a vague and general role to the applicant in the assault.

¶9

(3). The applicant is an old senior citizen aged about 75 years who is frail in body and physically incapable of inflicting serious injuries as alleged in the prosecution

¶10

case.

¶11

(4). The applicant has not been identified as the principal offender who inflicted life threatening injury on the injured.

¶12

(5). The applicant does not have any criminal history apart from the instant case.

¶13

(6). 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.

¶14

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

¶15

Let the applicant- Mohd Khawaja Siddiki 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:-

¶16

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

¶17

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

¶18

Order Date :- 23.1.2023 Dhananjai

¶19

Digitally signed by :- DHANANJAI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Mohd Khawaja Siddiki v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd Khawaja Siddiki 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

Dinesh Verma Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Deepak Khandelwal Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Shankar Lal Vs State of U.P.

Vijay Kumar Gupta Vs State of U.P.

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

Chandra Bhushan Singh Vs State of U.P.