Allowed

Mohammad Imran Alias Simran Taranshah v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt . Lucknow and Anr.

Allahabad HC16 Jan 2024/21/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal appeal reversing a bail rejection order. The court granted bail, holding the trial court erred in ignoring the five-month delay in filing the FIR and the absence of allegations during the deceased's inquest.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order dated 16.12.2021 set aside; appellant released on bail with furnishal of personal bond and two sureties.

Mohammad Imran Alias Simran Taranshah Vs State of U.P… — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:4261

¶2

Court No. - 35

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 21 of 2022

¶4

Appellant :- Mohammad Imran Alias Simran Taranshah Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt . Lucknow And Anr. Counsel for Appellant :- Seraj Ahmad,D.P. Dutt Tiwari Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Manoj Kumar,Vivek Kumar Mishra

¶5

Hon'ble Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal,J .

¶6

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

¶7

The present appeal has been filed for quashing the impugned order dated 16.12.2021 passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Lucknow arising out of Case Crime No. 30 of 2021, under Sections 302, 201 IPC and 3(2)(V) of SC/ST Act, Police Station- Jankipuram, District- Lucknow.

¶8

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that appellant was falsely implicated in the present case. He further submitted that the F.I.R. in question was lodged after five months by moving application u/s 156(3) Cr.P.C. as inquest as well as post-mortem of the body of deceased was conducted but no such complaint was made as alleged in the F.I.R. by the informant or other family members. He further submitted that charge sheet was submitted by the Investigating Officer in the most mechanical manner and the appellant is in jail since 03.10.2021. He further submitted that the bail application of the appellant was rejected by the trial court merely on the basis of presumption and there is no possibility of conclusion of trial in near future. He further submitted that the appellant has no criminal history, therefore, the impugned order is liable to be set aside and appellant may be enlarged on bail.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. opposes the prayer of appellant but he does not dispute this fact the F.I.R. was lodged after delay of five months on the order of learned Magistrate.

¶10

Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. and going through the contents of appeal as well as other relevant documents; as the F.I.R. was lodged after delay of five months and no such allegation was made at the time of inquest of the body of deceased, as the

¶11

appellant is in jail since 03.10.2021. In such circumstances, this Court is of the view that learned trial court failed to consider the aforesaid aspects, hence, the aforesaid impugned order is liable to be set aside and appellant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶12

Reluctantly, in the above facts and circumstances of the case, the trial of the case is not likely to be concluded in near future, hence, the present appeal has substance, and it is accordingly allowed, and the impugned order dated 16.12.2021 passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Lucknow is hereby set aside.

¶13

Let the appellant- Mohammad Imran @ Simran Taranshah 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:-

¶14

a. The appellant will not tamper with the evidence.

¶15

b. The appellant will not indulge in any criminal activity.

¶16

c. The appellant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and co-operate in the trial.

¶17

d. The appellant will appear regularly on each and every date fixed by the trial court unless their personal appearance is exempted through counsel by the court concerned.

¶18

Order Date :- 16.1.2024 A.Kr*

¶19

Digitally signed by :- AJAY KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Mohammad Imran Alias Simran Taranshah v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt . Lucknow and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohammad Imran Alias Simran Taranshah v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt . Lucknow and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Farman Khan and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Nitin Tiwari and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home and Another

Bihari Singh @ Deepak Singh and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru.Prin.Secy. Home Deptt. and Another

Vaibhav Pal Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and Another

Taqdeer Husian Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home, Lko. and Another

Ankit Kumar @ Abhishek Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another