Allowed

Ibrar v. the State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home, U.P. Civil Secrtt. Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC3 Apr 2024/1952/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench) allowed an appeal against the rejection of a bail application. The Court held that the trial court failed to consider relevant facts while rejecting bail, applying the *Prabhu* judgment. The respondent order was quashed and bail was granted subject to conditions.

What did the court decide?

The appeal was allowed, the order dated 08.06.2023 set aside, and the appellant is released on bail on personal bond and sureties.

Ibrar Vs the State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home… — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:27295

¶2

Court No. - 13

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1952 of 2023 Appellant :- Ibrar Respondent :- The State Of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home, U.P. Civil Secrtt. Lko. And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Syed Mohd. Munis Jafari,Sagar Singh,Shri Ram Maurya Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶6

The present appeal has been filed for quashing the order dated 08.06.2023 passed by learned Special Judge, (SC/ST Act)/Additional District and Session Judge, Court No. 2, Unnao.

¶7

It is evident from the record that office has reported twice that notice was sent to complainant, but neither any envelope nor any acknowledgment is received in return. Therefore, the appeal is being decided finally.

¶8

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that appellant has been falsely implicated in the present case as there is no evidence of abetment. He further submits that as per the prosecution case, it is alleged that appellant came to the house of informant along with other accused persons and started insisting informant's family members for solemnizing marriage of his daughter with Prem Shankar (brother of informant), but mother of Prem Shankar denied their demand, thereafter, they started giving threat, passed casteist remakrs as also abusive words. It is further alleged that accused persons gave threat by saying that they would make every effort that Prem Shankar would be behind bar if their demand was not fulfilled, as a result of the said threat, Prem Shankar committed suicide. It is further submitted that there is no evidence of abetment in the entire case diary, however, the charge-sheet was submitted by Investigating Officer in the most mechanical manner. It is further submitted that appellant is in jail since 10.03.2023, he does not have any criminal antecedent and the aforesaid relevant facts were not considered by learned trial court while rejecting the bail application, hence, the impugned order may be set aside and appellant may be released on bail.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposes the prayer of appellant and submits that

¶10

the alleged threat was given by appellant as well as other persons, as a result, brother of informant committed suicide which amounts to abetment.

¶11

Considered the submissions of learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. and going through the contents of appeal, F.I.R., impugned order as well as other relevant documents.

¶12

It is evident from the record that cause of death of deceased is asphyxia due to result of ante-mortem hanging. It is further evident that as per the prosecution case, appellant and other accused persons visited house of informant and insisted for solemnizing marriage of their sister with Prem Shankar, but mother of informant denied their demand, thereafter, they gave threat, passed some caste related words as well as abusive words by saying that they would make every effort that Prem Shankar would be behind bar if their demand is not fulfilled, as a result, Prem Shankar committed suicide.

¶13

All the aforesaid relevant facts were not considered, to the view of this Court, by the trial court while rejecting the bail application in the light of law propounded by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the judgment dated 30.01.2024 passed in Prabhu vs The State Rep By The Inspector Of Police on 30 January, 2024 (S.L.P. (Criminal) Diary No. 39981 of 2022) . Thus, this Court is of the view that the impugned order is liable to be set aside and appellant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶14

Resultantly, in view of the above facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that the trial of the case is not likely to be concluded in near future, hence, the appeal has substance and it is accordingly allowed and the order dated 08.06.2023 passed by learned Special Judge, (SC/ST Act)/Additional District and Session Judge, Court No. 2, Unnao is hereby set aside.

¶15

Let the appellant- Ibrar involved in the aforementioned 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, with the following conditions:-

¶16

(i) The appellant will cooperate with the prosecution during trial.

¶17

(ii) The appellant will not tamper with the evidence during trial.

¶18

(iii) The appellant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness(es).

¶19

(iv) The appellant shall not commit an offence.

¶20

(v) The appellant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶21

(vi) The appellant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through counsel.

¶22

(vii) The appellant will not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court.

¶23

(viii) The appellant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C.

¶24

As this order relates to enlargement of the appellant on bail, it is clarified that observations made in this order shall have no bearing on the merits of the case and the trial court shall not be influenced by any observation made in this order.

¶25

Order Date :- 3.4.2024

¶26

Mohit Singh/-

¶27

Digitally signed by :- MOHIT SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Ibrar v. the State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home, U.P. Civil Secrtt. Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ibrar v. the State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home, U.P. Civil Secrtt. Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Swayam Prakash Shukla vs State of U.P. and Another

Divya Srivastava and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrt. Lko. and Another

Israr Ahmad vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Ram Kishun @ Budhey Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Vinod Kumar Yadav @ Vinod Kumar and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home and Another

Anoop Kumar @ Nankau and Another Vs State of U.P Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Civil Secrt. Lko. and Another