This court granted bail to the applicant in a criminal case under the Customs Act, 1962. The court relied on coordinate bail orders for co-accused and the delay in trial to allow the prayer.
Allowed bail furnished with personal bond and two sureties in the like amount.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 86
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 59520 of 2022
Applicant :- Mohammad Naeem Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Sadrul Islam Jafri,Ambreen Masroor,Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Krishna Agarawal
Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.
Heard Shri N.I. Jafri, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Ms. Ambreen Masroor and Ali Zamal Khan, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Krishna Agarwal, learned counsel for the DRIopposite party no. 2 and Shri Mithilesh Kumar, and Shri Raj Kumar Mishra, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State and perused the record.
It has been contended by the learned Senior counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. It is further submitted by learned Senior counsel that co-accused Mohd. Tufail and Mohammad Alam having similar role have been granted bail by the coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 23.03.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 57731 of 2022 and the applicant is also entitled for bail on the ground of parity. It is further submitted that trial is not likely to be concluded in near future. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused has also been touched upon at length. It has been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required. It has also been submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 07.11.2022 and he has no criminal history.
Learned counsel for the DRI and learned A.G.A. have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and have submits that prima facie offence against the accused applicant is made out and in case applicant is release on bail, he will misuse the liberty of bail, but, they could not disputed the aforesaid facts.
Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case,
submissions of learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the nature of offence, evidence, complicity of accused, looking to the delay in conclusion of trial, and also considering the judgement passed by coordinate Bench of this Court granting bail to coaccused persons and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and the law laid down by the Apex Court in Satendra Kumar Antil Vs. C.B.I. & Another, passed in S.L.P.(Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021 , the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.
Let the applicant Mohammad Naeem Ali involved in Case Crime No. 02 of 2022, under Sections 135(1)(A) and 135 (1)(B) of Custom Act, 1962 through Director of Intelligence, District Meerut be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions.
(i) The applicant will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever.
(ii) The applicant will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.
(iii) The applicant will not indulge in any unlawful activities.
(iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever.
The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.
Order Date :- 1.5.2023 Bhanu
Digitally signed by :- BHANU PRATAP KUSHWAHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to bail given the parity of co-accused bail orders and delay in trial.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Satendra Kumar Antil Vs. C.B.I. & Another, passed in S.L.P.(Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021Relied on¶10
Mohammad Naeem
State of U.P.
Director of Intelligence, District Meerut
Vivek Kumar Singh
Bhanu Pratap Kushwaha
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
