Allowed

Mohd. Shaheem @ Kasim v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lucknow

Allahabad HC16 May 2024BAIL/5310/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The applicant sought bail in a case registered under the U.P. Gangster and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986. The court, without expressing an opinion on merits, allowed the bail application subject to standard conditions regarding witness intimidation and cooperation with the trial.

What did the court decide?

Bail allowed on furnishing personal bond and two sureties subject to conditions.

Mohd. Shaheem @ Kasim vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy… — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:58531

¶2

Court No. - 31

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5310 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Mohd. Shaheem @ Kasim Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lucknow Counsel for Applicant :- Anil Kumar Pandey,Farooq Ayoob,Mohd. Islam Khan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶6

The instant bail application is being heard through video conferencing.

¶7

Heard Sri Anil Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri Nikhil Kumar Singh, learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record.

¶8

Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 119 of 2022, under Section 3(1) of U.P. Gangster and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station - Zaidpur, District - Barabanki, during the pendency of trial.

¶9

It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the prosecution under the Gangsters Act has been launched against the applicant on the basis of one criminal case shown in the gang chart in which he has already been enlarged on bail by the court concerned. Criminal history of 11 more cases assigned to the applicant has been explained in the affidavit. He has been falsely implicated in the present case due to police rivalry. He is not a member of any gang. The applicant is not a previous convict. The applicant is languishing in jail since 27.02.2023 and in case, he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate with trial.

¶10

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail prayer of the applicant on the ground that the applicant has been convicted in one of the cases although he could not dispute the fact that he has been enlarged on bail in the said case also.

¶11

Without expressing any opinion on the merits, the bail application is allowed . Let the applicant Mohd. Shaheem @

¶12

Kasim, involved in aforesaid crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions that :-

¶13

i. The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.

¶14

ii. The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

¶15

iii. The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶16

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

¶17

Order Date:- 28.8.2024 Siddhant

¶18

(Justice Krishan Pahal)

¶19

Digitally signed by :- SIDDHANT SAHU High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Mohd. Shaheem @ Kasim v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lucknow

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd. Shaheem @ Kasim 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

Veerendra Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Secy. Home Lko.

Veerendra Kumar vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Secy. Home Lko.

Nityanand Rai Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Ram Surat @ Ram Surat Nishad Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Ram Surat @ Ram Surat Nishad vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Kuldeep Singh Chauhan vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Deptt. of Home