Allowed

Saqib and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC12 Feb 2020ABAIL/1083/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court granted anticipatory bail to applicants Saqib and Faizi Alias Dada in a case involving alleged firing at a police party under sections 307, 427, and 504 IPC. The court imposed strict conditions regarding availability for interrogation, no inducement to witnesses, and expedited investigation within four months.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted on a personal bond of Rs. 50,000 with two sureties, subject to conditions of investigation within four months and appearance in court.

Saqib and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 66

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 1083 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Saqib And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Mohd Raghib Ali,Saghir Ahmad(Senior Adv.) Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rajul Bhargava,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Saghir Ahmad, learned senior counsel assisted by Mohd. Raghib Ali, learned counsel for the applicants, 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 applicants have been framed in this case by the police. It is alleged that the applicants had fired on the police party, however, no one sustained any injury. Subsequent to his false implication in the present case two other cases of petty nature were clamped on them; the applicants have no prior history before the present antecedent. 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 A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail.

¶8

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusation and having no criminal antecedents, the applicants are entitled to be released on anticipatory bail in this case.

¶9

In the event of arrest of the applicants Saqib, Faizi Alias Dada involved in Case Crime No. 641 of 2019, u/s 307, 427, 504 IPC, P.S. Kotwali, District Rampur, 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. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the police station concerned with the following conditions.

¶10

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

¶11

that the applicants shall not, directly or indirectly make any

¶12

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 or tamper with the evidence;

¶13

that the applicants shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court;

¶14

that in default of any of the conditions mentioned above, the investigating officer shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicants;

¶15

that the investigating officer is directed to conclude the investigation in the present case in accordance with law expeditiously, preferably, within a period of four months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order independently without being prejudiced by any observation made by this court while considering or deciding the present bail application of the applicants;

¶16

that the applicants are directed to produce certified copy of this order before the SSP/SP concerned within 10 days from today, who shall ensure the compliance of the present order;

¶17

that in case charge-sheet is submitted the applicants shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial;

¶18

that the applicants shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;

¶19

that the applicants shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;

¶20

that in case of breach of any of the above conditions the court below shall have the liberty to cancel the bail;

¶21

It is made clear that if the charge-sheet is submitted and cognizance is taken and matter is committed to the court of session, as the case may be, the trial court shall decide the trial preferably within a period of one year from the cognizance/ committal of the case to the Court of Sessions.

¶22

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

¶23

Order Date :- 12.2.2020 Dhirendra/

Saqib and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Saqib 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Babloo Vs State of U.P.

Durgesh Saroj Vs State of U.P.

Laxmi Kant Mishra Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Lourence Attri Vs State of U.P.

Ayush Dixit @ Sumit and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Digvijay Nath Tewari Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others