Allowed

Irshad Khan and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC5 Dec 2019BAIL/52437/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment grants anticipatory bail to applicants charged with offences under sections 406 and 506 IPC alleging money dispute and cheque bounce. The High Court directed police investigation conduction within three months.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail allowed on surety; investigation to conclude within 3 months; regular bail applicability post-report submission.

Irshad Khan and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another — Cheque Dishonour | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 66

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 52437 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Irshad Khan And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Amit Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Shiv Ram Dubey,Uma Nath Pandey

¶4

Hon'ble Rajul Bhargava,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Amit Kumar, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Uma Nath Pandey, counsel for opposite party no. 2, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the first information report as well as rejection order.

¶6

Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that the dispute is purely of money transaction between the parties and prima facie no offence u/s 406 IPC is made out at this stage; he further submitted that according to F.I.R., cheque was issued by the applicants, which got bounced and the informant instead of instituting proceeding u/s 138 N.I. Act has lodged the F.I.R. The matter needs deeper and fairer investigation before any arrest should be given effect to. Therefore, the applicants may be enlarged on anticipatory bail.

¶7

Learned counsel for the informant has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the charge-sheet has been submitted against the applicants in the court, however, he is unable to point out as to whether cognizance has been taken or not.

¶8

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusation, the applicants are entitled to be released on anticipatory bail in this case.

¶9

In case the court has already taken cognizance over the chargesheet, they shall not be released on anticipatory bail and the applicants shall appear before the court and apply for regular bail.

¶10

In the event of arrest of the applicants Irshad Khan and Ainuddin involved in Case Crime No. 541 of 2019, u/s 406, 506 IPC, P.S. Dhanghata, District Sant Kabir Nagar shall be released on anticipatory bail till the submission of police report if any under section 173 (2) Cr.P.C. before the competent Court on their furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- with two

¶11

sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the police station concerned with the following conditions.

¶12

(i) the applicants shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

¶13

(ii) the applicants 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 them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

¶14

(iii) the applicants shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court and if they have passport the same shall be deposited by them before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned.

¶15

In default of any of the conditions, the Investigating Officer is at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicants.

¶16

The Investigating Officer is directed to conclude the investigation of the present case in accordance with law expeditiously preferably within a period of three months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order independently without being prejudice by any observation made by this Court while considering and deciding the present anticipatory bail application of the applicants.

¶17

The applicants are directed to produce a certified copy of this order before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned within ten days from today, who shall ensure the compliance of present order.

¶18

Let the copy of this order be sent by the Registrar General of this Court to Sessions Judge concerned for it's compliance.

¶19

In view of the aforesaid, the application for anticipatory bail is, accordingly, allowed.

¶20

Order Date :- 5.12.2019 Dhirendra/

Irshad Khan and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Irshad Khan and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ranjeet Kumar Gond and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Anand Tiwari@Nandu Vs State of U.P.

Ashwani Pandey @ Anoop Vs State of U.P.

Teetu (Minor) Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Dinesh Yadav @ Bablu Yadav Vs State of Up and Another

Parwaj Alam and Another Vs State of Up and Another