Allowed

Irshad @ Chhodda v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC14 Feb 2025CRLA/1077/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Appellant convicted under Sections 393, 307/34, 504 IPC sought regular bail pending appeal, arguing he was on bail throughout trial and no firearm injury was found despite a firing allegation. Court allowed bail with conditions including deposit of fifty percent of fine.

What did the court decide?

Regular bail till outcome of appeal, subject to personal bond, two sureties, deposit of 50% of fine in three months and compliance conditions.

Irshad @ Chhodda vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

Court No. - 85

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1077 of 2025

¶3

Appellant :- Irshad @ Chhodda Respondent :- State of U.P. Counsel for Appellant :- Rizwan Ullah Siddiqui Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.

¶5

(Order on Appeal)

¶6

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

¶7

Admit.

¶8

Summon the lower court record.

¶9

List the case in its turn.

¶10

(Crl. Misc. Suspension of Sentence Application No. 1 of 2025)

¶11

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

¶12

This bail application has been filed by the appellant with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in S.T. No. 509 of 2017 arising out of Case Crime No. 920 of 2016, u/s 393, 307/34, 504 I.P.C., Police Station- Deoband, District- Sharanpur.

¶13

Learned counsel for the appellant-applicant submits that applicant does not have any criminal antecedent and has falsely been implicated in the present case. As per prosecution case, role of firing is assigned to the applicant, but no firearm injury is found on the body of the alleged injured. Doctor was also examined as PW-3 who categorically deposed before the court that the injury found on the body of the injured was not caused by any firearm but the learned court below failed to appreciate the evidences in correct perspective and convicted the appellant. Learned counsel for the appellant lastly submits that during the course of trial, the appellant-applicant was on bail and the appeal is already admitted. There is no possibility in near future for the final hearing of the present appeal, therefore, the applicant-appellant is entitled for regular bail.

¶14

Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposes the prayer for bail and submits that the court below has passed the impugned order after considering the evidence placed before it at the time of trial and there is no illegality in the same. However, he does not dispute the fact that during the course of trial, the appellant-applicant was on bail and after conviction, trial court enlarged the appellants on interim bail.

¶15

Considering the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant-applicant, learned A.G.A. and going through the record as well as the judgment of the court below dated 10.12.2024, it is evident that appellant was on bail during the course of trial and after conviction, trial court enlarged the appellant on interim bail. In such circumstances, this Court is of the view that the applicant-appellant is entitled for regular bail till the outcome of the instant appeal.

¶16

Hence, prima facie, case for bail is made out, at this stage.

¶17

Accordingly, the application for bail is allowed.

¶18

Let the applicant-appellant, namely, Irshad @ Chhodda involved in Session Trial No. 509 of 2017 (supra) be released on bail on his furnishing personal bonds and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to following conditions;

¶19

(i) Fifty percent of fine imposed by the trial court shall be deposited by the appellant within three months from the date of his release.

¶20

(ii) The appellant-applicant shall cooperate in the disposal of appeal without seeking unnecessary adjournment.

¶21

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

¶22

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

¶23

As soon as personal bonds and sureties are furnished, photocopies of the same are directed to be transmitted to this Court forthwith by the trial court concerned to be kept on record of this appeal.

¶24

Order Date :- 14.2.2025/Nisha

¶25

Digitally signed by :- nisha kumari High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Irshad @ Chhodda v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Irshad @ Chhodda v. State of U.P.

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

Similar cases

Aruna Chaudhary vs Dr. Raj Kumar Vishwakarma, Chairman, Uttar Pradesh Police Recruitment and Promotion Board, Tulsi Ga

Manjoor Ali and Another vs State of U.P. and 18 Others

Shanti Devi vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Ram Kunwar Singh vs State of U.P. and 8 Others

Pushpendra Singh Chauhan vs Sudhir Sharma and 2 Others

State of Up vs Rakesh Dhobi S/O Durjan