Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 4, Cited by 0]

Allahabad High Court

Mohammad Yunus Ansari vs State Of U.P. on 11 July, 2019

Author: Aniruddha Singh

Bench: Aniruddha Singh





HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 76
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5102 of 2019
 

 
Applicant :- Mohammad Yunus Ansari
 
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Ramesh Kumar Singh,Abhishek Mayank,Abhishek Srivastava,Rajiv Lochan Shukla
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.
 

Counter and rejoinder affidavit filed today are taken on record.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Mayank Kishra (B.H.), learned counsel appearing for the State and perused the record.

According to prosecution case, F.I.R. was lodged against three accused persons, namely, Pandit Nache @ Krishna Chandra Chaturvedi, Rajnish Mishra and Mohd. Yunus alleging that on 7.8.2018 Vinod Kumar Ojha was killed by bumb blast. After investigation, charge-sheet was submitted against Mohd. Hanif, Santosh Mishra, Mohd. Javed, Vikas Gautam and Mohammad Yunus Ansari. Main role of throwing bumb was assigned to co-accused Vikas Gautam after long time in the confessional statement of Udai Bhan Singh before the Police personnel.

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that co-accused Mohd. Haneef and Mohammad Javed have already been enlarged on bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide orders dated 20.12.2018 and 23.1.2019 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 48221 of 2018 and 3148 of 2019 and the case of the applicant is not grievous than the case of co-accused, who have already been enlarged on bail, hence the applicant is also entitled to bail on the ground of parity. The applicant is languishing in jail since 24.8.2018 (about eleven months) having no criminal history. The applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. Except confessional statement of Udai Bhan Singh before the Police personnel, there is no legal evidence against the applicant. Recovery of motorcycle and phone were not connected with the crime. There is no independent witness/eye witness account against the applicant. Two accused persons named in the F.I.R. were exonerated by the Investigating Officer. Maximum role of the applicant is extended upto 120B I.P.C. 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. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid fact as argued by learned counsel for the applicant and admitted that applicant has no criminal history and also admitted that the case of the present applicant is identical to the case of co-accused-Mohd. Haneef and Mohammad Javed, who have already been enlarged on bail.

Considering the submission of learned counsel for the parties, facts of the case, nature of allegation and period of custody, gravity of offence, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the opinion that it is a fit case for bail. Hence, the bail application is hereby allowed.

Let the applicant Mohammad Yunus Ansari involved in Case Crime No. 468 of 2018, under Section 302, 120-B, 34 IPC, Police Station-Meja, District-Allahabad be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:

1. The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.
2.The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.
3.The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.
4.The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.
5.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.

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail.

Order Date :- 11.7.2019 OP