Allowed

Shuaib v. State of Up and Another

Allahabad HC21 Oct 2024ABAIL/10184/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court was presented with an application for anticipatory bail. Upon hearing submissions that the allegations involved no injury, the applicant had prior protection, co-accused were granted bail, and investigation was completed, the court enlarged the applicant on bail subject to sureties and conditions.

What did the court decide?

The applicant is enlarged on anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000 with two sureties each, subject to standard conditions regarding appearance, inducement, and passport deposit

Shuaib vs State of Up and Another — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:166815

¶2

Court No. - 67

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 10184 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Shuaib Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Umesh Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri V.P.Tripathi, learned A.G.A. for the State, and perused the material placed on record.

¶7

This application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 136 of 2018, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act, Police Station Lisari Gate, District Meerut.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. As per the allegations in the first information report, two groups were fighting amongst themselves. In the alleged incident, no person has received any injury. No injury report is available on the case diary. No overact has been assigned to the applicant. During the course of investigation, the applicant was granted protection by this Court vide order dated 13.02.2018 passed in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 3539 of 2018 (Parvej and 11 others Vs. State of U.P. and another). It is next contended that co-accused Rahisuddin @ Pappal and Sajid Neta @ Sajid have been granted anticipatory bail by this Court in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 Cr.P.C. No. 9687 of 2024 vide order dated 01.10.2024. The applicant had co-operated with the investigation, the investigation has been completed, charge sheet has been filed and the applicant has been summoned by the concerned court. No custodial interrogation is required. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. The applicant is entitled for anticipatory bail till the end of trial.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the

¶10

record.

¶11

Having regard to the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant, considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of the applicant, in particular the facts that in the alleged incident, no person has received any injury, no injury report is available on the case diary, no overact has been assigned to the applicants, during the course of investigation the applicant was granted protection by this Court, charge-sheet has been submitted and no custodial interrogation is required, without commenting on merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on anticipatory bail.

¶12

In the event of arrest, the applicant- Shuaib involved in the aforesaid case crime be released on anticipatory bail during pendency of trial, on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:

¶13

(i) the applicant shall make himself available on each and every date fixed in the matter by the court concerned;

¶14

(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 them from disclosing such facts to the Court;

¶15

(iii) the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court and if he has passport, the same shall be deposited by him before the concerned court.

¶16

In default of any of the conditions, the court concerned is at liberty to pass appropriate orders for enforcing and compelling the same.

¶17

The application stands disposed of.

¶18

Order Date :- 21.10.2024 SKT/-

¶19

Digitally signed by :- SHIVA KANT TIWARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Shuaib v. State of Up and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shuaib v. State of Up and Another

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

Similar cases

Bharat Lal vs State of U.P. and Another

Kanhaiya Lal vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Naimuddin vs State of Up and Another

Smt. Guddi Alias Kavita and Another vs State of U.P.

Deshraj vs State of U.P.

Diptee Singh vs State of U.P. and Another