Allowed

Faiyyaz v. the State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Govt. Civil Sectt. Lko.

Allahabad HC9 Feb 2024BAIL/1527/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under sections 302, 364, and 201 IPC, the court allowed bail for the accused. The court adopted reasoning from a co-accused's bail order, noting the recovery lacked independent witnesses, and found no flight risk or prior record.

What did the court decide?

Accused ordered to be released on bail on a personal bond and two sureties with conditions to attend hearings and not tamper with evidence.

Faiyyaz vs the State of U.P. Thru. Prin… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:12013

¶2

Court No. - 12

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1527 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Faiyyaz Opposite Party :- The State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Govt. Civil Sectt. Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Anil Kumar Sharma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA and perused the record.

¶7

The accused-applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.482 of 2021 under sections 302, 364, 201 IPC, P.S. Mahmudabad, District Sitapur.

¶8

It is argued that arising out of the same incident, one of the co-accused Jaheer Alam has been enlarged on bail vide order dated 11.01.2024 in Bail No.5208 of 2023.

¶9

The counsel for the applicant argues that as per the statement, the fact with regard to the applicant and the other accused being involved was informed to the informant, however no such reference is there in the FIR, which fact was also argued and was considered while deciding the bail application no.5208 of 2023.

¶10

As regards the recovery of danda from the applicant, the counsel for the applicant argues that the recovery was affected after twelve days while the applicant was taken on remand. He argues that even the said recovery is without any independent witnesses.

¶11

Considering the reasoning referred to in the order dated 11.01.2024 in respect of the bail granted to co-accused, thus, adopting the same reasoning coupled with the fact that the recovery allegedly from the applicant is not in the presence of any independent witnesses coupled with the fact that the applicant has no criminal history and there is no flight risk and there is no material on record to suggest that the applicant if enlarged on bail can have any adverse affect on the trial, the applicant is entitled for the bail. Thus the bail application is allowed.

¶12

Let the applicant Faiyyaz be released on bail in aforesaid first information report number subject to his furnishing a personal

¶13

bond and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:

¶14

(a) The applicant shall execute a bond to undertake to attend the hearings;

¶15

(b) The applicant shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which he is accused or suspected of the commission; and

¶16

(c) 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.

¶17

Order Date :- 9.2.2024 VNP/-

¶18

Digitally signed by :- VISHVANATH PRASAD SHUKLA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Faiyyaz v. the State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Govt. Civil Sectt. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Faiyyaz v. the State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Govt. Civil Sectt. 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

Mobin Ahmad Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home, Lko.

Adesh Kumar Yadav Alias Tillu Vs State of U.P. Thru.Prin.Secy. Home

Nadir Jang Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Govt. Lko and 3 Others

Vice Chancellor, Chandra Shekhar Azad University of Agriculture and Technology, Kanpur vs Rakesh Kumar Yadav

Satyam Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Civil Secrett. Lko. and 3 Others

Bhola Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko.