Allowed

Arshad v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin Secy. Home Lucknow

Allahabad HC1 Mar 2024BAIL/2406/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail application under Sections 201 and 304 IPC. Informant turned hostile during trial; applicant had no criminal history and was in custody since June 2023. Court allowed bail on personal bond with two sureties and standard conditions, without expressing opinion on merits.

What did the court decide?

Applicant to be released on bail in FIR/Case Crime No. 75 of 2023 on personal bond and two sureties of Rs.20,000/- each, subject to standard conditions.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:30738

¶2

Court No. - 12

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2406 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Arshad Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin Secy. Home Lucknow Counsel for Applicant :- Abrar Ahmad Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. and perused the record.

¶7

2 . In terms of the FIR, allegations were leveled against the applicant of commissioning the offence under Section 302 IPC by the sister in law of the applicant. The deceased was brother in law of the applicant.

¶8

3 .It is argued by the counsel for the applicant that subsequently the informant has turned hostile and has not supported the prosecution story and has stated that she had got the FIR done out of anger and at the dictation of certain persons. It is further argued that the applicant has no criminal history and is in custody since 06.06.2023, as such, he may be enlarged on bail.

¶9

4. Learned A.G.A. opposed the bail prayer.

¶10

5. Considering the fact that the informant has not supported the prosecution story during trial coupled with fact that the applicant has no criminal history and is in custody since 06.06.2023 and there is nothing on record to demonstrate that the applicant if enlarged on bail, would in any way adversely affect the trial and without expressing any opinion on merit, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed .

¶11

6. Let the applicant Arshad be released on bail in FIR/ Case Crime No. 75 of 2023, under Sections 201 and 304 IPC, Police Station Jankipuram, District Lucknow, on his furnishing personal bonds and two reliable sureties of Rs.20,000/- each to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:

¶12

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

¶13

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

¶14

(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.

¶15

Order Date :- 19.4.2024 Arun

¶16

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

Arshad v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin Secy. Home Lucknow

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arshad v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin Secy. Home Lucknow

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

Indresh Alias Chhotu Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Jyoti Soni Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Akshay Tiwari Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko.

Sajid Ali @ Munna and Others vs U.P. Board of Revenue, Lko. Thru. Its Chairman and Others

Anjesh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrett. Lko.

Nanga @ Mithlesh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Govt. Lko.