Allowed

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

Allahabad HC15 Mar 2024BAIL/3019/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench allowed a bail application filed by Yasin in an FIR under Sections 386 and 411 I.P.C. The court considered the provisional bail granted to co-accused and the explanation of the applicant's criminal history.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail through personal bond and two sureties of Rs.20,000/- each with conditions to attend hearings and not tamper with evidence.

Yasin vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:40920

¶2

Court No. - 12

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3019 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Yasin Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Kuldeep Gupta,Amir Ahmad Ansari,Syed Mohammad Parvaiz Yousif Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶7

The applicant seeks enlargement on bail in FIR No.316 of 2023 under Sections 386, 411 I.P.C., Police Station- Gomti Nagar Vistaar, District Lucknow.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant argued that co accused Sitabi and Saleem with almost similar allegations, were enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 22.5.2024 and 27.5.2024. From the said two co accused namely Sitabi and Saleem, allegedly Rs.1,38,000/- and Rs.2,00,000/were recovered while from the applicant, allegedly Rs.1,50,000/- was recovered. He thus argues that the applicant having criminal history of two cases which have been duly explained in paragraph 18 of the affidavit filed in support of the bail application and he is in jail since 24.12.2023, may be enlarged on bail.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. opposes the bail application.

¶10

Considering the allegations against the applicant to be similar to that of the co accused Satibi and Saleem coupled with the fact that the applicant is in jail since 24.12.2023 having criminal history duly explained in paragraph 18 of the affidavit filed in support of the bail application, the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶11

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

¶12

Let the applicant Yasin be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing personal bonds and two reliable sureties

¶13

of Rs.20,000/- each 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 offences 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 :- 29.5.2024 Shukla

¶18

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

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Yasin 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

Irfan Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Govt. U.P. Lko. and Others

Kushlesh Dixit Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lucknow

Jagdish Soni Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt., Lko.

Saleem vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Gurcharan vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko. and 3 Others

Harun Ali vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.