Allowed

Mohammad Saheem v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home U.P. Lko.

Allahabad HC11 Jul 2024/7506/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 7506 of 2024, the Allahabad High Court granted bail to Mohammad Saheem, invoking a personal bond and sureties, as the court found it fit to grant bail without expressing an opinion on the merits of the allegations.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount.

Mohammad Saheem Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt… — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:47184

¶2

Court No. - 4

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7506 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Mohammad Saheem Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home U.P. Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Dhananjai Kumar Tripathi,Devendra Verma,Tanupriya Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned Additional Government Advocate for the State.

¶7

As per learned counsel for the applicant, the present applicant is languishing in jail since 9.6.2024 in Case Crime No. 116 of 2024 u/s 3(1) of U.P. Gangsters & Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, P.S. Sirsiya, District Shrawasti.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the present applicant has falsely been implicated in this case as he has not committed any offence as alleged in the prosecution story.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant has further submitted that against the present applicant there are two cases shown in the gang chart (Annexure No. 2) in which the applicant has been granted bail by this Court. The bail order has been enclosed as Annexure Nos. 3 & 4 to this bail application. The other four cases have been explained in para 9 of the bail application enclosing therewith the bail orders. The co-accused Chhottan @ Ekabaal has already been granted bail by this Court on 31.5.2024.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant undertakes on behalf of applicant that the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail, if so granted by this Court and shall abide by all terms and conditions of the bail order and shall cooperate with the trial proceedings.

¶11

Learned Additional Government Advocate has, however, opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the investigation is going on but he has not disputed the aforesaid submission of learned counsel for the applicant.

¶12

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, perusing the material available on record, arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and also considering the fact that there are two cases shown

¶13

against the applicant in the gang chart and in that too he has already been granted bail, the other four cases have been explained in para 9 of the bail application, the coaccused Chhottan @ Ekabaal has already been granted bail by this Court on 31.5.2024 and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail.

¶14

Let the applicant- Mohammad Saheem , be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number 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:-

¶15

(i) 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 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.

¶16

(ii) 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.

¶17

(iii) 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 applicants fail 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.

¶18

(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) 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.

¶19

(Rajesh Singh Chauhan, J.)

¶20

Order Date :- 11.7.2024/Om

¶21

Digitally signed by :- OM PRAKASH MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Mohammad Saheem v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home U.P. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohammad Saheem v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home U.P. 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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Dinesh Kumar Gupta Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Balwan Singh Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Revenue, Lko. and 2 Others

Nand Kumar Mishra and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and 5 Others

Girish Chandra Sonkar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Trade Tax Lko and 3 Others

Rampal Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko

Dileep Kumar Singh and 11 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy./ Prin. Secy. Panchayat Raj Deptt. Lko. and 3 Others