Allowed¶13

Kallu @ Riaz v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Allahabad HC19 Apr 2024/2656/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Grant of bail under S.439 Cr.P.C. on parity with co-accused; offence under Sections 3/5A/8, Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act, 1955; Case Crime No. 0232 of 2022, P.S. Musafirkhana, District-Amethi; seven accused; anticipatory bail to two co-accused and regular bail to three co-accused by coordinate Benches; applicant in jail since 04.09.2022; criminal history of three cases; bail on personal bond and two sureties with conditions and cancellation clause; neutral citation 2024:AHC-LKO:30929.

What did the court decide?

Release of applicant Kallu Alias Riaz on bail in Case Crime No. 0232 of 2022 on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount, subject to imposed conditions; bail cancellable on breach of any condition. ¶13

Kallu @ Riaz Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2024)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶13

Issue for consideration

Whether applicant Kallu @ Riaz, involved in Case Crime No. 0232 of 2022 under Sections 3/5A/8 of The Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act, 1955 (P.S. Musafirkhana, District-Amethi), is entitled to be enlarged on bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. during the pendency of trial.

¶8

Court's answer

Since co-accused under similar accusation have already been granted bail by this Court, the applicant has made out a case for bail on the ground of parity, and the bail application is allowed.

¶12

Ratio / Principle

The applicant is to be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount, subject to conditions imposed in the interest of justice (cooperation with trial, no inducement or tampering with evidence, no involvement in criminal activity, verification of sureties), with liberty to the court concerned to cancel bail on breach of any condition.

¶13

Key takeaways

Anything said in the order is limited to the purpose of determining the bail application and is not an expression on the merits of the case; the trial court remains free to reach independent conclusions on the evidence.obiter¶20

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail allowed — High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench (Sanjay Kumar Singh, J.), Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 2656 of 2024, decided 19.4.2024: Regular bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. granted to Kallu @ Riaz, accused in Case Crime No. 0232 of 2022 under Sections 3/5A/8 of The Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act, 1955, P.S. Musafirkhana, District-Amethi, principally on the ground of parity — co-accused Mohammad Anees Alias Anees and Guljar @ Guljar Beg had been granted anticipatory bail (orders dated 10.11.2022 and 24.11.2022), and co-accused Mojeeb, Ashok Yadav and Rahul Kumar had been granted bail by a coordinate Bench (orders dated 18.10.2022, 13.12.2022 and 13.12.2022). Applicant in custody since 04.09.2022, with a stated criminal history of three cases explained in the affidavit. Release ordered on personal bond with two sureties, subject to conditions including cooperation with the trial and no tampering; the order is expressly confined to the bail determination and is not an expression on the merits.

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:30929

¶2

Court No. - 31

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2656 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Kallu @ Riaz Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Akhil Kumar Singh,Sachin Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Singh,J.

¶6

The case is taken up through video conferencing from Allahabad.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned Additional Government Advocate representing the State.

¶8

By means of this application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., applicant-Kallu Alias Riaz, who is involved in Case Crime No. 0232 of 2022, under Sections 3/5A/8 of The Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act, 1955, P.S. Musafirkhana, District-Amethi, seeks enlargement on bail during the pendency of trial.

¶9

It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that there are total seven accused in this case, namely, Ashok Yadav, Rahul Kumar, Kallu Alias Riaz (applicant), Mojeeb, Shahzade, Gulzar and Anees. Applicant has been falsely implicated in this case by the police. There is no independent/public eye witness of the alleged recovery. Applicant has a criminal history of three cases which have been explained in the afÏdavit. The co-accused Mohammad Anees Alias Anees and Guljar @ Guljar Beg have been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide orders dated 10.11.2022 and 24.11.2022 in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application Nos. 1860 of 2022 and 1908 of 2022 respectively. It is further submitted that co-accused Mojeeb, Ashok Yadav and Rahul Kumar have been granted bail vide orders of coordinate Bench of this Court dated 18.10.2022, 13.12.2022 and 13.12.2022 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 11933 of 2022, 14562 of 2022 and 14541 of 2022 respectively. The case of

¶10

the applicant stands on identical footing to that of aforesaid co-accused who have been granted bail by this Court, hence the applicant is also entitled for bail on the ground of parity. Lastly, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that there is no chance of the applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the prosecution evidence. The applicant is languishing in jail since 04.09.2022 and in case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and cooperate with the trial.

¶11

Per contra, learned A.G.A. for the State opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant by contending that innocence of the applicant cannot be ad-judged at pre-trial stage but did not dispute the above factual aspect of the matter as argued on behalf of the applicant.

¶12

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and examined the matter in its entirety, I find substance in the submission of learned counsel for the applicant that co-accused as noted above under similar accusation have been granted bail. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as keeping in view the nature of the accusation, severity of punishment, evidence, complicity of the accused, this Court is of the opinion that the applicant has made out a case for bail on the ground of parity. Hence, the bail application is hereby allowed .

¶13

Let the applicant- Kallu Alias Riaz , 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 concerned with the following conditions, which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶14

(i) That the applicant shall cooperate in the expeditious disposal of the trial and shall regularly attend the court unless inevitable.

¶15

(ii) That the applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any

¶16

person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police ofÏcer or tamper with the evidence.

¶17

(iii) That after his release, the applicant shall not involve in any criminal activity.

¶18

(iv) The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned.

¶19

In case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail.

¶20

It is clarified that anything said in this order is limited to the purpose of determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. The trial court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led unaffected by anything said in this order.

¶21

Order Date :- 19.4.2024 Kashifa

¶22

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

Kallu @ Riaz v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kallu @ Riaz v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Prashant Srivastava and 2 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Ajay @ Lallu vs State of Up

Bhagwan Verma @ Shri Bhagwan Singh and 7 Others vs State of Up and Others

Dinesh Kumar Yadav @ Dinesh Yadav vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Dinesh Kumar Yadav @ Dinesh Yadav vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko

Kallu @ Riaz vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.