Allowed

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

Allahabad HC17 May 2024BAIL/3767/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This bail order allowed the release of the applicant on personal bond and sureties with specific conditions, including those regarding evidence tampering, appearance, and proceedings under the Cr.P.C. and IPC.

What did the court decide?

The applicant to be released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties fulfilling specific conditions regarding evidence tampering and court appearance.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:38053

¶2

Court No. - 31

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3767 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Abubakar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko Counsel for Applicant :- Bhanu Pratap Singh,Mohd. Tariq Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.

¶7

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Abubakar, with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 70/2021 under Sections 376D, 506 IPC and 67-A of I.T. Act, Police Station- Indira Nagar, DistrictLucknow, during pendency of trial.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant has contended that the coaccused, Gurfan, Noor Alam and Abdulla, have been granted bail by this Court on 21.10.2021 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 8334 of 2021, 12354 of 2021 and 14312 of 2021 respectively. The case of the applicant stands on identical footing, hence the applicant is also entitled for bail on the ground of parity for the reasons given in bail application of coaccused.

¶9

Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail, but does not dispute the claim of parity.

¶10

Let the applicant involved in aforesaid case be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶11

(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.

¶12

(ii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in Court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶13

(iii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶14

(iv) In case the applicant misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicants fail to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation then the Trial Court shall initiate proceedings against him in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶15

(v) The applicant shall remain present in person before the Trial Court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the Trial Court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶16

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶17

Identity and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

¶18

Order Date :- 17.5.2024 Abhishek

¶19

Digitally signed by :- ABHISHEK YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abubakar 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

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

Anuj Kumar @ Anuj vs State of Up 4 Others

X- Minor vs State of U.P. and Another

Abubakar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko

Vishnu Gupta @ Vishnu Kumar Gupta Vs State of U.P. Thru. the Prin.Secy. Home

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