Allowed

Rauf Haji @ Mohd. Raoof v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC15 Dec 2020ABAIL/9090/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court granted anticipatory bail to the applicant in a fraud case involving a forged vehicle registration, releasing him on a personal bond with two sureties until the submission of the police report, subject to standard conditions and ensuring expeditious investigation.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted until the submission of the police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. on furnishing a bond of Rs. 25,000 with two sureties. Investigation directed to be concluded expeditiou

Rauf Haji @ Mohd. Raoof Vs State of U.P. — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 70

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 9090 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Rauf Haji @ Mohd. Raoof Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Shivangi Bhargava,Ajay Kumar Srivastava,Neeraj Kumar Bhargava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶5

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

¶6

The instant anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Rauf Haji @ Mohd. Raoof, with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 199 of 2020, under Sections- 379, 411, 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C., Police Station- Kotwali, District- Rampur.

¶7

Prior notice of this bail application was served in the office of Government Advocate and as per Chapter XVIII, Rule 18 of the Allahabad High Court Rules and as per direction dated 20.11.2020 of this Court in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 Cr.P.C. No. 8072 of 2020, Govind Mishra @ Chhotu Versus State of U.P., hence, this anticipatory bail application is being heard. Grant of further time to the learned A.G.A. as per Section 438 (3) Cr.P.C. (U. P. Amendment) is not required.

¶8

There is allegation against the applicant that he was found in possession of scooty having forged registration number. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. He was not having any such scooty. He has no criminal history to his credit. He has definite apprehension that he may be arrested by the police any time.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the applicant.

¶10

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusation and his antecedents, the applicant is entitled to be released on anticipatory bail for limited period in this case considering the exceptions considered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi)- 2020 SCC Online SC 98 and order dated 22.05.2020 passed by this Court in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application No. 2609 of 2020.

¶11

In the event of arrest of the applicant, he 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 furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- 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:-

¶12

(i) The applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by the police officer as and when required;

¶13

(ii) 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 from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police office;

¶14

(iii) The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court and if he has passport, the same shall be deposited by him before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned;

¶15

(iv) The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad;

¶16

(v) The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.

¶17

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 applicant.

¶18

The Investigating Officer is directed to conclude the investigation of the present case in accordance with law, expeditiously, independently without being prejudiced by any observations made by this Court while considering and deciding the present anticipatory bail application of the applicant.

¶19

The applicant is directed to produce a copy of this order downloaded from the official website of this Court before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned within ten days from today, who shall ensure the compliance of present order.

¶20

Order Date :- 15.12.2020 KS

Rauf Haji @ Mohd. Raoof v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rauf Haji @ Mohd. Raoof v. State of U.P.

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

Anil Chakravarty Vs State of U.P.

Smt Suresh Bala Vs State of U.P.

Asif Vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt. Reeta Balwani Vs State of U.P.

Raj Bahadur and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Imran Vs State of U.P.