Allowed

Shahid Jamal v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko

Allahabad HC25 May 2024BAIL/5589/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This bail application was disposed of by the Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench) which enlarged the applicant on bail. The court noted prima facie weak evidence linking the accused to the offence due to the absence of witnesses during recovery and granted bail subject to conditions.

What did the court decide?

The applicant was released on bail on personal bond and two surety bonds of Rs. 20,000/- each.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:39826

¶2

Court No. - 12

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5589 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Shahid Jamal Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko

¶5

Counsel for Applicant :- Desh Deepak Singh,Sandeep Kumar Pal

¶6

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶7

Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.

¶8

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

¶9

2 . The applicant seeks enlargement on bail in FIR No.3 of 2023, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B IPC and Sections 3 and 6 of the Indian Wireless Telegraphy Act, 1933 and Sections 4, 20, 21, 25 of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1985 and Sections 66, 66D of IT Act, Police Station ATS Gomtinagar, District Lucknow.

¶10

3 . In terms of the FIR it was alleged that a recovery of SIM card, Laptop, Mobile Phone, Power Extension, Router, Inverter, Battery, Fiber, adopter etc. were effected, which according to the FIR constituted an offence under the Indian Wireless Telegraphy Act. It was alleged that the said persons engaged in providing international calls, which resulted in the loss of revenue to the State. The said call is being used for notorious activities which may not be ruled out. The name of the applicant surfaced in the FIR on the basis of an information received from an informant (Mukhbir).

¶11

4 . The Counsel for the applicant argues that the apprehension of the applicant was shown after two days of the alleged recovery and thus he argues that there is no substantial material to link the applicant to the offence in question. He specifically argues that even if the the version of the FIR is treated to be gospel truth, no offence can be said to be made out under Sections 467 and 471 of IPC.

¶12

5. Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the bail prayer by arguing that the recovery was effected from the rented house of the applicant and thus no case for bail is made out.

¶13

6. Considering the fact that the applicant was apprehended and linked with the offence in question based upon the recovery of telegraphic instruments including SIM card etc; prima facie , the recovery was effected neither in the presence of the applicant nor in the presence of any independent witness; prima facie the evidence to link the applicant with the offence in question is a weak piece of evidence; the applicant has a criminal history of similar nature, in which, the applicant is on bail and considering the fact that most of the offences are punishable for a term of less than 7 years, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed .

¶14

7. Let the applicant Shahid Jamal be released on bail in the abovesaid first information report number 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:

¶15

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

¶16

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

¶17

(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.

¶18

Order Date :- 25.5.2024 akverma

¶19

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

Shahid Jamal v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shahid Jamal 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

Aamin Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko. and 3 Others

Mohd. Salman Vs the State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Civil Sectt. Lko. U.P.

Aman Verma Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home

Faiz Ahmad Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Govt. Lko

Meera Srivastava vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Faiz Ahmad vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Secy. Home Lko.