Allowed

Mohd. Ahmad @ Sheru v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko and 3 Others

Allahabad HC5 Sept 2024/9500/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal bail application, the Allahabad High Court at Lucknow Bench allowed the prayer to release the accused-applicant on bail. The court noted the applicant's lack of criminal history and the existence of enmity with the victim's family. Conditions for bail were imposed subject to a personal and surety bond.

What did the court decide?

The applicant Mohd. Ahmad @ Sheru was released on bail in Case Crime No. 0340 of 2024 subject to a personal bond, two sureties, and specific undertakings regarding attendance and conduct during trial.

Mohd. Ahmad @ Sheru Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief… — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:61124

¶2

Court No. - 14

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9500 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Mohd. Ahmad @ Sheru Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Arti Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶6

Heard Ms. Arti Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record. Learned A.G.A. on the basis of instructions submits that notices to the complainant has been served.

¶7

The present bail application has been filed by accused-applicant seeking bail in Case Crime No.0340 of 2024, under Sections 191(2), 75(2), 76, 333, 324(2), 115(2), 351(2), 352 BNS and Section 3(1)(da), 3(1)(dha) SC/ST Act and Section 5/6 POCSO Act, P.S. Kotwali Dehat, District Sultanpur.

¶8

Learned counsel for applicant submits that applicant has been falsely implicated in this case along with ten other co-accused persons by making general allegation. There are two victims in this case. As alleged in the prosecution case, both the victims have given varied statements under Section 161 Cr.P.C. The victims have made improvement while giving statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. There is no corroborative material on record. They have refused to undergo medical examination. Applicant has no criminal history and enmity between the applicant and the family of the victim is admitted. He submits that the applicant is in jail since 10.08.2024.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer however, submits

¶10

that charge-sheet in the case has been filed.

¶11

On due consideration to the submissions advanced, perusal of the record as also the fact that the applicant is languishing in jail since 10.08.2024 having no criminal history, statements of the victims under Sections 161 & 164 Cr.P.C. and the fact that applicant has no criminal history, charge-sheet in the case has been filed, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed .

¶12

Let the applicant Mohd. Ahmad @ Sheru be released on bail in aforesaid case crime number subject to his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court concerned with the following conditions:

¶13

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶14

(ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶15

(iii) 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

(iv) 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.

¶17

(v) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case

¶18

of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶19

(vi) 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 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 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶20

Order Date :- 5.9.2024 Saurabh Yadav/-

¶21

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

Mohd. Ahmad @ Sheru v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd. Ahmad @ Sheru v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko and 3 Others

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

Mohd. Saifi @ Samiul Haq Ansari Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home, Lko.

Ram Gopal Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Dr. Siddhartha Patel @ Dr.Siddhartha Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another

Alok Giri and Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Basic Education Deptt. Lko and 2 Others

Manoj @ Manoj Kumar vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko and Another

Kamlesh Tiwari vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko