Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2018
  6. /
  7. January

Naeem vs State Of U P

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|30 October, 2018
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 28
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 41403 of 2018 Applicant :- Naeem Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Kapil Kumar,Sandhya Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.
Heard learned counsel for applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
This bail application has been filed by the applicant Naeem seeking bail in Case Crime No. 1320 of 2018, under Section 364 IPC, Police Station Sahibabad, District Ghaziabad.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant is not named in the FIR and subsequently in the statement of first informant, name of co-accused Rajendra has surfaced, who had kidnapped the son of the first informant. Thereafter, in the statement of co-accused Rajendra, name of the applicant Naeem along with one Shaukeen has surfaced. The boy is shown to have been recovered from the joint custody of Shaukeen and Rajendra and the applicant Naeem from the house of co-accused Shaukeen.
Learned counsel for the applicant has next submitted that the co- accused Rajendra has already been granted bail by this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 28338 of 2018 vide order dated 30.07.2018.
He has further submitted that the applicant has no criminal history to his credit and he is in jail since 22.05.2018 and in case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.
Per contra, learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the fact that the co-accused Rajendra has already been granted bail by this Court and boy has been recovered from the house of co-accused Shaukeen and memo showing the recovery of kidnapped boy has been signed by all the three accused persons including Rajendra.
Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail.
Let the applicant Naeem be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions :-
(i) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity.
(ii) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.
(iii) The applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses.
(iv) The applicant shall regularly appear on the dates fixed by the trial court unless his personal attendance is exempted by the trial court.
In case of default of any of the conditions enumerated above, it will be open to the opposite parties to approach the Court for cancellation of bail.
Order Date :- 30.10.2018 Nadim
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

Naeem vs State Of U P

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
30 October, 2018
Judges
  • Rajiv Gupta
Advocates
  • Kapil Kumar Sandhya Singh