Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2019
  6. /
  7. January

Arman vs State Of U P

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|31 July, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 80
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 30754 of 2019 Applicant :- Arman Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Pawan Singh Pundir Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ajit Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.
By means of this application, the applicant who is involved in Case Crime No. 112 of 2019, under Sections 392 and 411 I.P.C., P.S. New Mandi, district-Muzaffarnagar, is seeking enlargement on bail during the trial.
Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant was not named in the first information report. He is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to some ulterior motive. No incriminating article or material has been recovered either from the applicant or on his pointing out. The alleged recovery of a motorcycle which has been shown from his possession is totally false and fake. There is no public witness of the alleged recovery. No identification parade was conducted to ascertain the real culprit. He lastly submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 28.2.2019 and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.
Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that there is criminal history of 11 cases against the applicant, hence he is not entitled to be enlarged on bail.
In reply, learned counsel for the applicant submitted that he has explained the criminal history in para 9 of the affidavit accompanying the bail application.
Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of the punishment, submissions of learned counsel for the parties, considering the law laid down in the case of Data Ram Vs. State of U.P. and others, 2018(3) SCC 22 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail during the pendency of the trial.
Let the applicant, Arman be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned in Case Crime No. 112 of 2019, under Sections 392 and 411 I.P.C., P.S. New Mandi, district-Muzaffarnagar subject to the following conditions:-
1. The applicant will continue to attend and co-operate in the trial pending before the court concerned on the date fixed after release.
2. He will not tamper with the witnesses.
3. He will not indulge in any illegal activities during the bail period.
It is further directed that the identity, status and residence proof of the sureties be verified by the authorities concerned before they are accepted.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the trial court will be at liberty to cancel the bail.
Order Date :- 31.7.2019 Faridul
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Arman vs State Of U P

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
31 July, 2019
Judges
  • Ajit Singh
Advocates
  • Pawan Singh Pundir