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 3, Cited by 0]

Allahabad High Court

Gayyur Ahmad vs State Of U.P. on 31 October, 2023

Author: Krishan Pahal

Bench: Krishan Pahal





HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:208045
 
Court No. - 72
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 45863 of 2023
 

 
Applicant :- Gayyur Ahmad
 
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Dhiraj Kumar Pandey
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.
 

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Yogesh Mishra, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record.

2. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 293 of 2023, U/S 147, 148, 323, 352, 325, 336, 308, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Nkur, District Saharanpur, during the pendency of trial.

3. It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that similarly placed co-accused person, Shahnazar has already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 19.10.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 41637 of 2023. The applicant is languishing in jail since 24.8.2023 having no criminal history. He further submitted that since the role of the applicant is identical to that of co-accused, who has already been enlarged on bail, he is also entitled to be enlarged on bail on the ground of parity.

4. The prayer for bail has been vehemently opposed by learned A.G.A. However, the aforesaid factual aspects of parity to the co-accused and of no criminal history of the applicant, have not been disputed by him.

5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, pending trial and in light of the judgement passed by this Court in Nanha S/o Nabhan Kha vs. State of U.P., 1993 Crl.L.J. 938 and the judgement passed by the Apex Court in Paras Ram Vishnoi vs. The Director, Central Bureau of Investigation, MANU/SCOR/22410/2021, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicants have made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed on the ground of parity.

6. Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for grant of bail on the ground of parity.

7. Without expressing any opinion on the merits, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant- Gayyur Ahmad who is involved in aforementioned case crime number be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

(i) The applicant shall not tamper with evidence.
(ii) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the Trial Court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the Trial Court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

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

9. It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.

(Justice Krishan Pahal) Order Date :- 31.10.2023 Shalini