SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Sarfarz vs State Of U.P. on 20 November, 2019

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH

?Court No. – 12

Case :- BAIL No. – 11077 of 2019

Applicant :- Sarfarz

Opposite Party :- State of U.P.

Counsel for Applicant :- Mayank Pandey,Ravi Kant

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon’ble Aniruddha Singh,J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Akhilesh Awashthi, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.

According to prosecution case, F.I.R. was lodged against the applicant alleging that he cheated Rs. 60,000/- to the complainant to sell his house.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. Said money was returned to the complainant on 16.12.2011 and prove this fact one affidavit is annexed at page no. 14 of the bail application signed by applicant and complainant. Compromise took place between the parties. There is no independent witness and no legal evidence against the applicant. Offences levelled against the applicant are not attracted in the present case. He is languishing in jail since 1.10.2019 (more than one and half months) having no criminal history 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.

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 applicant Sarfarz involved in Case Crime No. 554 of 2011, under Section 406 IPC, Police Station Kotwali Akbarpur, District Ambedkar Nagar 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 :- 20.11.2019

A. Singh

 

 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Not found ...? HOW TO WIN 498a, DV, DIVORCE; Search in Above link

All Law documents and Judgment copies
Laws and Bare Acts of India
Landmark SC/HC Judgements
Rules and Regulations of India.

STUDY REPORTS

Copyright © 2021 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation
×

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation