Allowed

Usman v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC22 Nov 2022ABAIL/10713/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Single Judge allowed an anticipatory bail application under S. 438 Cr.P.C. for the applicant facing trial under the Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act, relying on Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi). Bail was granted subject to standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail allowed with personal bond and two sureties subject to specific conditions regarding investigation and trial attendance.

Usman Vs State of U.P. — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 78

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 10713 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Usman Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Farid Ahmad Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri V.K. Gupta, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record.

¶6

The present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime no. 247 of 2022, under Sections 3/5/8 Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act, Police Station- Faizganj Behta, District-Budaun, with the prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.

¶7

As per prosecution story, the FIR was lodged against unknown persons with respect to some body parts belonging to cow progeny were found near Lakshman Prasad cold store by police on 30.8.2022 at about 6.30 am.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case with a view to cause unnecessary harassment and to victimize him. Learned counsel has stated that applicant has been falsely implicated in two cases on the statement of the arrested co-accused Naeem, and the applicant has been enlarged on anticipatory bail in the other case. Applicant is not a previous convict. It is further stated that applicant is cooperating in the investigation and is ready to cooperate in future also. There is no likelihood of the applicant repeating the said offence, if any. Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicant to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against him. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicant have also been touched upon at length.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant and the fact that applicant is not a previous convict.

¶10

On due consideration to the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties and in view of the law laid down by the

¶11

Apex Court in the case of "Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-(2020) 5 SCC 1", the applicant is entitled to be released on anticipatory bail in this case.

¶12

In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed . In the event of arrest, let the accusedapplicant Usman be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on bail on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned/Station House Officer of the police station concerned with the following conditions:-

¶13

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

¶14

that 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 him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence;

¶15

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

¶16

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

¶17

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

¶18

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

¶19

In case of breach of any of the above conditions the court below shall have the liberty to cancel the bail.

¶20

It is made clear that observations made hereinabove are exclusively for deciding the instant anticipatory bail application and shall not affect the trial or deciding the regular bail application.

¶21

Order Date :- 22.11.2022 Shalini

¶22

Digitally signed by SHALINI JAISWAL Date: 2022.11.23 12:42:58 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Usman v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Usman 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

Prem Singh and Another Vs State of U.P.

Shri Bhagwan Alias Shri Bhagwan Raghuvanshi and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Kamal Vs State of U.P.

Imran Vs State of U.P. and Another

Devmati Devi Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Surendra Alias Annu Alias Surendra Kashyap Vs State of U.P.