Allowed

Suleman v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC16 Dec 2020ABAIL/9331/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court granted an anticipatory bail to Suleman. The applicant was implicated in an FIR involving serious offenses, including attempt to murder. The court allowed bail for a limited period until the submission of the police report.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted for a limited period till the submission of the police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. along with a personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- and two sureties.

Suleman 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. - 9331 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Suleman Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Amir Khan,Anil Kumar Srivastava (Senior Adv.) Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Anil Kumar Srivastava, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Amir Khan, learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State.

¶6

Order on Criminal Misc. Exemption Application

¶7

This exemption application is allowed.

¶8

Order on Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application

¶9

The instant Anticipatory Bail Application has been filed with a prayer to grant an anticipatory bail to the applicant, namely, Suleman , in Case Crime No.- 1257 of 2020, under Sections147, 148, 149, 307, 506 IPC, Police Station- Kotwali City, District- Bulandshahar.

¶10

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.

¶11

There are allegations against 13 persons in the FIR regarding the alleged offences. Learned Senior Counsel for the applicant has submitted that the specific role has been assigned to one coaccused, Kasim. The applicant has been generally implicated. In the statement of the injured he has not named the applicant. The applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. He has no criminal history to his credit. He has definite apprehension that he may be arrested by the police any time.

¶12

Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of

¶13

the applicant.

¶14

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.

¶15

In the event of arrest of the applicant 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/ Court of the police station concerned with the following conditions:-

¶16

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

¶17

(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;

¶18

(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.

¶19

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

¶20

(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.

¶21

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.

¶22

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.

¶23

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.

¶24

Order Date :- 16.12.2020 Rohit

Suleman v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suleman 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

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

Smt. Reeta Balwani Vs State of U.P.

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

Ravi Kumar Gupta Vs State of U.P.

Puran and Another Vs State of U.P.

Vikas Kumar Vs State of U.P.