Nadeem Ahmad Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko.

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:43833

Court No. - 12

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5188 of 2024

Applicant :- Nadeem Ahmad Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Shailendra Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State and also perused the material placed on record.

¶7

The present bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime/FIR No.137 of 2023, under Sections 3 (1) of U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities Act, Police Station- Kotwali Dehat, District- Bahraich with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant is an innocent person and has been falsely implicated in the case, he is in jail since 15.04.2024. He further submitted that two cases in the gang chart have been mentioned against the applicant and in both the cases, he is on bail. He further submitted that co-accused, namely, Razi has already been granted bail by this Court, vide order dated 30.05.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.7168 of 2023. In these circumstances, the applicant is also entitled for bail. In case of being enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶9

During course of arguments, learned counsel for the applicant placed before this Court a photocopy of bail order of coaccused, namely, Razi is taken on record.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant but has fairly conceded that similarly situated coaccused Razi has already been granted bail.

¶11

Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. and going through the record as well as order of co-accused, this Court is of the view that it is a fit case for bail. The bail application is allowed on the ground of parity.

¶12

Let the applicant- Nadeem Ahmad , who is involved in

¶13

aforementioned case 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 subject to following conditions.

¶14

(i) The applicant shall not commit or participate in any offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.

¶15

(ii) 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

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

¶17

(iv) 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 IPC.

¶18

(v) 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., may be issued and if 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 IPC.

¶19

(vi) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the Trial Court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the Trial Court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶20

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

¶21

Order Date :- 21.6.2024 V. Sinha

¶22

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

Nadeem Ahmad v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nadeem Ahmad v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. 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

Atul Kumar Verma Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home Lucknow

Ram Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 3 Others

Chhotey Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 3 Others

Gulam Mohammad @ Allarakha Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Civil Sectt. Lko. and 3 Others

Meera Srivastava Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Meera Srivastava Vs State of U.P. Thru.Prin. Secy. Home, Civil Sectt. Lko.