Allowed

Modh. Ajju v. State of U.P.Thru.Secy.Deptt.of Home Lko.and Another

Allahabad HC2 Sept 2022/319/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court granted anticipatory bail to Modh. Ajju regarding a case under the U.P. Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act, 1955. The court held that grounds for bail were made out following Supreme Court precedent and imposed standard conditions including personal bond and availability for investigation.

What did the court decide?

Application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. allowed; applicant directed to be enlarged on personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- and two sureties with specific conditions.

Modh. Ajju Vs State of U.P.Thru.Secy.Deptt.of Home Lko.and… — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 15

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 319 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Modh. Ajju Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.Thru.Secy.Deptt.Of Home Lko.And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ravindra Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.

¶5

Heard Shri Ravindra Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Shiv Kumar Mishra, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.

¶6

The instant Anticipatory Bail Application has been filed with a prayer to grant an anticipatory bail to the applicant, namely, Modh. Ajju in Case Crime No. 310 of 2021, under Sections 3/5/8 of U.P. Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act, 1955, Police Station - Gosaiganj, District - Sultanpur after rejecting anticipatory bail application of the applicant by Sessions Judge, Sultanpur vide order dated 21.01.2022.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. It is further submitted that the applicant is not named in the first information report. The F.I.R. has been lodged against unknown person. No incriminating article has been recovered from the possession of the applicant. The alleged recovery of 2 quintal beef from the open field of village Naipurwa Faridipur has been made without compliance of Section 100 of Cr.P.C. The applicant has a criminal history of another case which has been explained in para no.15 of the affidavit in which he has been granted bail by the court below which is Case Crime No.172 of 2018. In the aforesaid case he has also not been named in the F.I.R. It is further submitted that interim anticipatory bail has been granted to the applicant on 05.04.2022. It is further contended that the applicant is ready to participate in the investigation.

¶8

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

¶9

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

¶10

Application U/S 438 Cr.P.C. No. 8072 of 2020, Govind Mishra @ Chhotu Vs. 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

It is settled position of law that the anticipatory bail being an extraordinary privilege should be granted only in exceptional cases. Parameters for grant of anticipatory bail in a serious offence are required to be satisfied, where the Court is prima facie of the view that the applicant has falsely roped in the crime and would not misuse his liberty.

¶12

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC Online SC 98, ground for grant of anticipatory bail is made out.

¶13

In case of arrest, the applicant, Modh. Ajju is directed to be enlarged on anticipatory bail in above case crime number till the conclusion of trial, on his furnishing personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- and two sureties each of like amount before the Station House Officer of Police Station/Court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶14

(i) The applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by the police officer as and when required, if investigation is in progress;

¶15

(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 such person from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

¶16

(iii) The applicant shall not leave the country 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/Court concerned;

¶17

(iv) The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by the applicant along-with a self attested identity proof of the said person (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number to which the said Aadhar Card is linked ;

¶18

(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.

¶19

The Investigating Officer will continue with the investigation, if it is in progress and will not be affected by this order.

¶20

A copy of this order shall also be produced before the S.P/S.S.P concerned by the applicants, within a week, if the investigation is still in progress, who shall ensure compliance of this order.

¶21

With the aforesaid directions, the present Anticipatory Bail Application is allowed.

¶22

Order Date :- 2.9.2022 S. Shivhare

¶23

Digitally signed by SHASHANK SHIVHARE Date: 2022.09.06 11:57:43 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Modh. Ajju v. State of U.P.Thru.Secy.Deptt.of Home Lko.and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Modh. Ajju v. State of U.P.Thru.Secy.Deptt.of Home Lko.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

Shyam Kishore Vs State of U.P. Thru.Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Ajay Tiwari Vs State of U.P. Thru. the Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and Another

Ram Adhar @ Anurag Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home. Lko.

Nisabu @ Nisabuddin Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Anoop Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru Prin.Secy. Home and Anr.

Sayyed @ Shahjad Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko.