Allowed

Mohd. Saddam @ Saddam Ahmad v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko.

Allahabad HC5 Mar 2024/2353/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench) allowed a bail application under Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 2353 of 2024. The court granted bail on grounds of parity with a co-accused released on bail in a related case, imposing standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on personal bond and two sureties with conditions to submit undertaking under Section 19(4) of U.P. Gangster Act and appear in court.

Mohd. Saddam @ Saddam Ahmad Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy… — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:20006

¶2

Court No. - 14

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2353 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Mohd. Saddam @ Saddam Ahmad Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Ravindra Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶6

Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record. Heard learned counsel for the accused-applicant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶7

Learned counsel for accused-applicant while pressing the bail application submits that the accused-applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case as well as in the two cases mentioned in the gang chart. In both cases mentioned in the gang chart, he has been released on bail. The bail order are on record as Annexure No. 3 and 4 to the bail application. Apart from the cases mentioned in the gang chart, there is no other case pending against the accused applicant. He further submits that co-accused Saddam Hussain has been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 08.02.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.1491 of 2024. Applicant seeks parity with the bail order of co-accused Saddam Hussain (supra).

¶8

It has been further submitted that applicant is in jail since 29.01.2024 and if facility of bail is granted, there is no apprehension that he will flee from the judicial process and he will abide by the orders passed by the Court below and will cooperate in speedy trial of the case.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but has not disputed the factual submissions made by the learned counsel

¶10

for the accused-applicant and the fact that it's a case of parity. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, and also considering the nature of allegations, arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties and the fact that applicant has been enlarged on bail in two cases shown in the gang chart, there is no other criminal history of applicant; applicant is in jail since 29.01.2024 as also the fact that applicant claims parity with the bail order of co-accused Saddam Hussain (supra) and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed on the grounds of

¶11

parity.

¶12

Let the applicant, Mohd. Saddam @ Saddam Ahmad involved in Case Crime No. 417 of 2023, under Sections 2/3(1) of U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station - Lambhuwa District - Sultanpur 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 which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶13

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶14

(ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶15

(iii) The applicant 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.

¶16

(iv) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of

¶17

this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (v) The applicant shall submit an undertaking on affidavit in terms of Section 19 (4) of the U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 that he will not indulge in any case for or misuse the liberty of bail.

¶18

(vi) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶19

(vii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶20

Order Date :- 5.3.2024

¶21

Saurabh Yadav/-

¶22

Digitally signed by :- SAURABH YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Mohd. Saddam @ Saddam Ahmad v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd. Saddam @ Saddam Ahmad v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko.

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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Adesh Pathak vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 2 Others

Smt. Shiva Shukla vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home U.P. Lko. and 2 Others

Nitesh Singh (According to Aadhar Card Nitesh Kumar Singh) vs State of U.P Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Satendra Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lucknow and Others

Manoj Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Others

Taj Mohammad Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.