Allowed

Islam v. State of Uttarakhand

Uttarakhand HC22 Oct 2021BA1/1871/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Uttarakhand allowed the bail application of Islam who was charged with robbery, criminal breach of trust, and criminal intimidation. The court observed that there is no reason to keep the applicant in custody indefinitely and granted bail with conditions.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail on execution of personal bond and furnishing of two reliable sureties with specific conditions.

Islam Vs State of Uttarakhand — Bail and Remand | Uttarakhand HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL

¶2

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR VERMA

¶3

22^nd OCTOBER, 2021

¶4

FIRST BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1871 of 2020

¶5

Between:

¶6

Islam …Applicant and State of Uttarakhand. …Respondent

¶7

Counsel for the Applicant : Mr. Mehboob Rahi.

¶8

Counsel for the Respondent : Mr. T.C. Agarwal, learned Deputy Advocate General with Mr. P.S. Uniyal, learned Brief Holder for the State.

¶9

Hon’ble Alok Kumar Verma,J.

¶10

This bail application has been filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for grant of regular bail in connection with F.I.R. No.361 of 2020, registered with Police Station Kashipur, District Udham Singh Nagar for the offence under Sections 392, 411 & 506 of I.P.C.

¶11

On 19.07.2020, an FIR was lodged by the informant Gaurav Kumar Rajput. According to the FIR, on 18.07.2020 at 02:05 hrs, four persons entered the house of the informant with knives and under threat took away various articles from his house. The FIR was registered at 18:40 hrs. against the four unknown persons. During the investigation, a purse and Aadhaar Card of the informant and I.D. of the informant’s wife were recovered from the possession of the present applicant. After completion of the investigation, charge-sheet has been filed.

¶12

¶13

Heard Mr. Mehbooh Rahi, the learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. T.C. Agarwal, the learned Deputy Advocate General with Mr. P.S. Uniyal, the learned Brief Holder for the State.

¶14

Mr. Mehboob Rahi, the learned counsel for the applicant, submitted that the applicant is an innocent person; he has been falsely implicated; the alleged recovery memo was prepared on the public place, however, no independent witness was secured; no Test Identification Parade was conducted; the co-accused persons have been granted bail by this High Court; the applicant is in custody since 29.07.2020; he has not been convicted in any criminal case; charge-sheet has been filed, therefore, there is no chance of tampering with the evidence.

¶15

Mr. T.C. Agarwal, the learned Deputy Advocate General appearing for the State opposed the bail application. However, he fairly conceded that the coaccused persons of identical role have been granted bail by this Court.

¶16

Bail is the rule and committal to jail is an exception. Refusal of bail is a restriction on the personal liberty of the individual, guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The object of keeping the accused person in detention during the trial is not punishment. The main purpose is manifestly to secure the attendance of the accused.

¶17

Having considered the submissions of learned counsel for both the parties and in the facts and circumstances of the case, there is no reason to keep the applicant behind the bars for an indefinite period,

¶18

¶19

therefore, without expressing any opinion as to the merit of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant deserves bail at this stage.

¶20

8. The bail application is allowed.

¶21

Let the applicant Islam be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions :-

¶22

i) The applicant shall attend the trial court regularly and he shall not seek any unnecessary adjournment;

¶23

ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of this case.

¶24

It is clarified that if the applicant misuses or violates any of the conditions, imposed upon him, the prosecution will be free to move the court for cancellation of bail.

¶25

___________________ ALOK KUMAR VERMA, J.

¶26

Dt: 22^nd October, 2021 Pant/

Islam v. State of Uttarakhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Islam v. State of Uttarakhand

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

Bhuwan Chandra Bhatt Vs State of Uttarakhand

Deepak Sheel Vs State of Uttarakhand

Km. Sunita Arya Vs State Of Uttarakhand and Another

Santosh Singh Dobal Vs Rama Dobal Alias Vandana

Arbaaz Vs Smt. Sajda Parveen

Som Prakash Vs State of Uttarakhand