Allowed

Mosin v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Allahabad HC13 Dec 2024BAIL/12868/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Single Judge allowed the bail application of the applicant in a robbery case under Section 395 IPC. The release was granted as the applicant was implicated solely on the basis of a co-accused's statement, with no independent proof against him, and other co-accused were already on bail.

What did the court decide?

Mosin released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties subject to conditions not to tamper with evidence or witness and to appear on fixed dates.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:83850

¶2

Court No. - 29

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12868 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Mosin Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Iqbal Ali Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Iqbal Ali, the learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri Abhishek Kumar Singh, the learned State Counsel and perused the record.

¶7

The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.49 of 2023, under Section 395 I.P.C., registered at Police Station Banthra, District Lucknow.

¶8

The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of F.I.R. lodged on 16.02.2023 naming four persons as accused on the basis of suspicion, alleging that a truck loaded with packets of mustard oil was robbed by four unknown miscreants.

¶9

On the basis of information received form a mukbir, the police apprehended one Ashiq and in his custodial statement, he stated that he had given effect to the incident along with Aslam and the robbed goods were sold to one Shiv Shanker Shukla. He further stated that incident was given effect to by him along with 13 other named persons, including the applicant. Besides the aforesaid custodial statement of co-accused person, there is no material against the applicant and nothing has been recovered from his possession or his pointing out.

¶10

The applicant's criminal history has been disclosed in para 29 of the affidavit filed in support of the bail application in which no chargesheet has been filed as yet. It has been further submitted that the three other co-accused persons namely, Afroz, Mustak and Aslam have

¶11

already been granted bail by this Court by means of orders dated 22.09.2023, 06.10.2023 and 12.10.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos.11439 of 2023, 11811 of 2023 and 12190 of 2023 respectively.

¶12

The learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer of the bail, but he could not dispute the aforesaid aspects of the matter.

¶13

Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the fact that the applicant has been implicated in the present case on sole basis of custodial statement of a co-accused person and nothing has been recovered from his possession and three other co-accused persons have already been granted bail and without making any observations which may affect the merits of the case, I am of the view that the aforesaid facts are sufficient for making out a case for enlargement of the applicant on bail.

¶14

Accordingly, this bail application stands allowed .

¶15

Let the applicant- Mosin be released on bail in the aforementioned case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Magistrate/Court concerned, subject to the following conditions: -

¶16

(i) the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence;

¶17

(ii) the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses;

¶18

(iii) the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court.

¶19

(Subhash Vidyarthi,J.)

¶20

Order Date :- 13.12.2024

¶21

-Amit K-

¶22

Digitally signed by :- AMIT KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Mosin v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mosin 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Vakeel Ahmad vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 2 Others

Miraj Ahmad and 9 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home Lko and 2 Others

Firdaus Akhtar @ Shadab Akhtar vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko

Haribhan Yadav@ Pappu vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko

Sandeep Maitee vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko

Ram Prakash Tiwari and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. District Magistrate, Pratapgarh and Another