Allowed

Shalu Ali v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Allahabad HC4 Jul 2024/6020/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench, granted bail to the applicant in a case under Section 364 IPC. The court permitted release on personal bond and sureties based on parity with co-accused who were previously granted bail for identical roles, subject to standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail subject to furnishing personal bond and two sureties and compliance with bail conditions.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:45617

¶2

Court No. - 17

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6020 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Shalu Ali Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Shailesh Kumar Singh,Aditya Singh Tomer,Vijay Kumar Asthana Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State of U.P. and perused the record.

¶7

The present bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No.311 of 2022 under Sections 364 I.P.C., Police Station Bheera, District Lakhimpur Kheri, with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent person and he is in jail since 24.6.2022. He further submits that coaccused, Irshad and Shamshad having identical role, have already been granted bail by this Court, vide order dated 10.5.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.10907 of 2022 (bail order provided by learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record). 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

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer of the applicant for grant of bail, but he conceded the fact that co-accused Irshad and Shamshad have already been granted bail by this Court.

¶10

Considering the rival submissions of learned counsel for parties, material available on record, contents of the F.I.R., other relevant documents, bail order of the co-accused, Irshad and Shamshad, ground of parity as well as totality of fact and circumstances, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶11

Let applicant - Shalu Ali - be released on bail in aforesaid Case Crime, on his furnishing personal bond and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:-

¶12

(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.

¶13

(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 ofÏcer or tamper with the evidence.

¶14

(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.

¶15

(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 sufÏcient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A IPC.

¶16

(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.

¶17

(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 sufÏcient cause, then it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat

¶18

such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶19

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

¶20

Order Date :- 4.7.2024 Gaurav/-

¶21

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

Shalu Ali v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shalu Ali v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Raj Rastogi @ Jagdamba Prasad Rastogi Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home, U.P. Lucknow

Karm Ruchi Singh Somvanshi Vs Sri Vijay Pratap Singh, Basic Shiksha Adhikari, Hardoi

Chandraprakash Vs Mr. Ranvijay Singh, Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lko.

Masooq Ali @ Raju Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Sakir Ali @ Guddu Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Mahmood Ali Vs Sri Shivendra Pratap Singh, District Basic Education Officer, Raebarlei