Allowed

Mohd. Gufran v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt.

Allahabad HC17 Jan 2024/497/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail application by an accused in a theft/receiving stolen property case (Sections 379/411 IPC) who was not named in the FIR, had eleven criminal antecedents explained, and whose identically placed co-accused had already been granted bail; charge-sheet filed, accused in jail since July 2023.

What did the court decide?

Accused-applicant Mohd. Gufran to be released on bail on furnishing personal bond with two sureties and compliance with conditions against tampering, non-cooperation, or further crime.

Mohd. Gufran Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:4599

¶2

Court No. - 15

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 497 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Mohd. Gufran Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Counsel for Applicant :- Sunil Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Mohd. Faiz Alam Khan,J.

¶6

Learned A.G.A. informs that she has procured complete instructions in the matter including upto date case diary of the case and charge sheet has already been submitted.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the accused-applicant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶8

This bail application has been moved by the accused/applicant- Mohd. Gufran for grant of bail, in Case Crime No. 21/2023, under Sections 379/ 411 I.P.C., Police Station- Sadarpur, District- Sitapur, during trial.

¶9

Learned counsel for the accused-applicant while pressing the bail application submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case and he has not committed any offence as claimed by the prosecution. He was not named in the F.I.R. and he is shown to have been arrested with other co-accused persons and from his possession an Alto Car and four keys of motorcycles are shown to have been recovered.

¶10

It is vehemently submitted on behalf of the applicant that the alleged offences against the applicant are triable by the Magistrate. Co-accused person, namely, Mohd. Vaki, whose role is at par with the applicant, has been granted bail by a Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 07.11.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 13198 of 2023.

¶11

It is also submitted that criminal history of eleven cases has been alleged against the applicant, however, out of these eleven cases, six cases, including the instant case, have been slapped against the applicant with the involvement of the applicant in the instant case and five cases were old and the same have been explained in Para No.14 of the bail application.

¶12

It is next submitted that applicant is in jail in this case since

¶13

25.07.2023, charge-sheet in this case has already been submitted and there is no apprehension that after being released on bail the applicant may flee from the course of law or may otherwise misuse the liberty.

¶14

Learned A.G.A., on the other hand, opposes the prayer of bail of the applicant on the ground that the applicant has committed an heinous offence and having regard to the material/evidence available against the applicant, he is not entitled to be released on bail, but could not controvert the other factual submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant.

¶15

Having regard to all the facts and circumstances and keeping in view that criminal history of 11 cases have been explained, out of which six cases including the instant case have been slapped against the applicant with his arrest in the instant case and also having an eye on the fact that identically placed coaccused person, namely, Mohd. Vaki has been granted bail, the facility of bail may be extended to the applicant. Charge-sheet in this case has already been filed. Applicant is in jail in this case since 25.07.2023. The presence of the applicant could be secured before the trial court by placing adequate conditions.

¶16

Having regard to the overall facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the considered view that applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is thus allowed .

¶17

Let the accused/applicant- Mohd. Gufran involved in above-mentioned case, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:-

¶18

(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.

¶19

(ii) The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

¶20

(iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶21

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶22

Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the Court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

¶23

Observations made herein-above by this court are only for the purpose of disposal of this bail application and shall not be construed as an expression of this Court on the merits of the case.

¶24

Order Date :- 17.1.2024 Gurpreet Singh

¶25

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

Mohd. Gufran v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd. Gufran v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt.

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

Chand Babu Vs the State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home and Another

Alpnath Tripathi Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Sukhvinder Singh Vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrt. Lko.

Virendra and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Sec. Home Lko.

Sheela Devi and Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home, Lko.

Tanveer Ahmad Khan Vs State of U.P. Thru. Regional Forest Officer Forest Deptt. Sharda Nagar Division South Kheri