Dismissed

Afzal Quraishi v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko

Allahabad HC23 Jul 2024BAIL/4573/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The applicant sought bail in a case registered under Sections 302/34 IPC. The court found no distinction between the applicant's role and that of a co-accused who was previously granted bail due to an oversight. Given the heinous nature of the offense, the court rejected the bail application and suggested the state consider filing for bail cancellation of the co-accused.

What did the court decide?

Bail application rejected.

Afzal Quraishi Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:49827

¶2

Court No. - 12

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4573 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Afzal Quraishi Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko Counsel for Applicant :- Farooq Ayoob Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Upendra Prakash Pathak

¶5

Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Farooq Ayoob, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Upendra Prakash Pathak, learned counsel for the complainant as well as Sri Surendra Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State respondent and perused the material brought on record.

¶7

2 . The present application has been filed on behalf of the applicant seeking enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 1040 of 2023, under Sections 302/34 IPC, Police Station Dewa, District Barabanki.

¶8

3 . In terms of the FIR, allegations of the commission of the offence were leveled against three unknown persons, subsequently based upon the confessional statement and the recovery, wherein it was stated that the applicant as we ll as the co-accused Niyamat Rasool had cause the injuries with the use of knife. As against the third person namely Arman, his name did not surface in the confessional statement also, as such, he was enlarged on bail vide order dated 13.03.2024.

¶9

4. The counsel for the applicant argues that even the other co-accused Niyamat Rasool was enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 04.07.2024. While granting bail to the said Niyamat Rasool, this Court had not noticed the

¶10

statement where the allegations were leveled against Niyamat Rasool of causing the injuries, which resulted in death.

¶11

6 . Considering the role of the applicant to be similar to Niyamat Rasool and considering the heinous nature of the offence, no case for bail is made out. The bail application is accordingly rejected.

¶12

7 . The learned A.G.A., if may deem appropriate be filed a bail cancellation application as apparently the bail order of Niyamat Rasool was passed without noticing the correct facts.

¶13

Order Date :- 23.7.2024 Arun

¶14

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

Afzal Quraishi v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Afzal Quraishi v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. 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

Shivam Pandey Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. and 3 Others

Raju Vs State of U.P. Thru.Prin.Secy. Home and 3 Others

Rahul Gautam Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Pradeep Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Ashok Chaurasia @ Ashok Kumar Chaurasia Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Mohd.Azad Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin.Secy. Home and 3 Others