Allahabad High Court High Court

Sabir vs State Of U.P. & Others on 15 July, 2010

Allahabad High Court
Sabir vs State Of U.P. & Others on 15 July, 2010
Court No. - 49

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 16181 of 2010

Petitioner :- Sabir
Respondent :- State Of U.P. & Others
Petitioner Counsel :- Mohd. Umar Khan
Respondent Counsel :- Govt. Advocate

Hon'ble Bala Krishna Narayana,J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A. G. A. for the State.

This application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Sabir, son of
Sabbir, involved in Case Crime No. 551 of 2009, under Section-2 / 3 of
Gangster Act, Police Station-Kankar Khera, District-Meerut, for being
enlarged on bail during the pendency of the trial.

It has been contended by learned counsel for the applicant that since, the co-
accused, Mohan has been granted bail by this Court in Crl. Misc. Bail
Application No. 1404 of 2010; Mohan Versus State of U. P. vide order dated
15.4.2010 and the role assigned to the applicant is identical to that of the co-
accused, Mohan, therefore, the applicant also is entitled to be enlarged on
bail.

This factual aspect of the matter has not been disputed by the learned A. G. A.

Considering the submissions made by counsel for the applicant and the fact
that the co-accused has been granted bail, this Court without expressing any
opinion on the merits of the case, is of the view that the applicant also is
entitled to be enlarged on bail on the ground of partiy.

Let the applicant, Sabir, son of Sabbir, involved in Case Crime No. 551 of
2009, under Section-2 / 3 of Gangster Act, Police Station-Kankar Khera,
District-Meerut 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 subject to the following conditions:-

1. The applicant shall record her attendance before the concerned C. J. M. on

the 7th day of every month.

2. The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.

3. The applicant shall co-operate in the early conclusion of the trial and will
not seek any unnecessary adjournment.

Order Date :- 15.7.2010
HR