Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Ravindra Maithani, J.
Shah Aalam & Ors. - Appellants
Versus
State of Uttarakhand - Respondent
First Bail Application No. 173 of 2023
Decided On : 19-01-2023
Bail - Criminal Law - The court granted bail to the applicants after considering the similarity of their roles with the co-accused who had already been granted bail, establishing a case of parity.
Fact of the Case:
The applicants sought release on bail in a case involving multiple sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and were granted bail by the court.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the similarity of the applicants' roles with the co-accused who had already been granted bail established a case of parity, leading to the decision to grant bail to the applicants.
Issues: Release on bail, similarity of roles with co-accused, case of parity
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the similarity of the applicants' roles with the co-accused who had already been granted bail, establishing a case of parity and warranting the grant of bail to the applicants.
Final Decision: The bail application of the applicants was allowed, and they were ordered to be released on bail upon executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties.
JUDGMENT
Ravindra Maithani, J. - Applicants-Shah Aalam, Shamim Ahmad @ Paatu and Mohammad Rafi are in judicial custody in FIR/Case Crime No.141 of 2020, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 352, 452, 325, 323 & 307 IPC, Police Station Gadarpur, District Udham Singh Nagar. They have sought their release on bail.
2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
3. It is argued that the co-accused having similar role have already been granted bail by this Court. It is a case of parity.
4. This fact is admitted by learned State Counsel.
5. Having considered, this Court is of the view that it is a case fit for bail. Accordingly, the applicants deserve to be enlarged on bail.
6. The bail application is allowed.
7. Let the applicants be released on bail, on their executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each of the like amount, by each one of them to the satisfaction of the court concerned.
The principle of parity in granting bail based on the similarity of roles with co-accused.
The court considered the bail granted to co-accused with a similar role as a significant factor in deciding to grant bail to the applicants.
The court considered the similarity of the applicants' roles to the co-accused who had been granted bail as a key factor in granting bail to the applicants.
The court considered the similar bail granted to co-accused and the provisions of the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, in granting bail to the applicant.
The court established that mere presence as a customer in a brothel does not constitute sufficient grounds for denying bail under the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act.
The significance of the Test Identification Parade is diminished if proper procedures regarding the identification of the accused are not followed, particularly concerning their being kept baparda.
The court may grant bail after considering factors such as the nature of the case, the co-accused's bail status, and the applicant's criminal record.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
