Allowed

Noor Jahan and 2 Others v. State of U.P and Another

Allahabad HC18 May 2022ABAIL/1221/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed an anticipatory bail application filed by three applicants facing charges under IPC Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 307 and Dowry Prohibition Act, ruling that grounds for bail were established based on prior Supreme Court precedents.

What did the court decide?

Enlarged upon anticipatory bail by furnishing personal bond of Rs. 25,000 and two sureties each of like amount.

Noor Jahan and 2 Others Vs State of U.P and Another — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 72

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 1221 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Noor Jahan And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ehtesham Afsar Khan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Ehtesham Afsar Khan, learned counsel for the applicants and Shri Pankaj Kumar Tripathi, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.

¶6

The present bail application has been filed on behalf of applicants Noor Jahan, Fareen and Naseem Ahmad under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, with a prayer to release them on anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 243 of 2021, for offence punishable under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 307 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, and Section 3/4 of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, 2019, registered at Police StationShergarh, District- Bareilly, during pendency of the trial, after rejecting the anticipatory bail application of the applicants by Special Judge S.C./ST Act, Bareilly vide order dated 20.01.2022.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case. The applicant no. 1 is mother-in-law, applicant no. 2 is sister-in-law (Nanad) and applicant no. 3 is brother-in-law (Devar) of the victim. As per the allegations of the first information report, marriage of the victim was solemnized with co-accused Waseem Ahmad on 07.11.2019 and the family of the victim has spent Rs.1.5 lacs on her marriage as cash and also given other household articles, but after sometime of the marriage of the victim, her in-law's demanded a car, inverter, Rs. 5 lac cash as additional dowry and committed marpit, harassing and made cruelty with the victim. They also tried to strangulate her neck. As per the allegations made in the first information report, general allegations have been levelled against the applicants for harassment, making cruelty and demand of additional dowry. No specific date and time has been mentioned in the said F.I.R. with regard to the incident. The first information report has been lodged after two months of the last incident. It is further submitted that husband of the victim was living at Delhi after taking back to the victim. The

¶8

applicants are no more required for custodial interrogation. The applicants have no criminal history and they have not undergone any imprisonment after conviction by any court of law in relation to any cognizable offence previously. It is further contended that the applicants are ready to participate in the investigation. The applicants were granted interim anticipatory bail by this Court on 22.2.2022.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the applicants, but could not point out anything adverse against the applicant.

¶10

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 applicants have falsely roped in the crime and would not misuse his liberty.

¶11

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the law laid down by the 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.

¶12

In case of arrest, the applicants, Noor Jahan, Fareen and Naseem Ahmad are directed to be enlarged on anticipatory bail in above case crime number till the conclusion of trial, on their 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:-

¶13

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

¶14

(ii) The applicants 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;

¶15

(iii) The applicants shall not leave the country without the previous permission of the Court and if they have passport, the same shall be deposited by them before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned/Court concerned;

¶16

(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

¶17

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 :- 18.5.2022 T. Sinha

¶23

Digitally signed by TRIPTI SINHA Date: 2022.05.20 17:01:48 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Noor Jahan and 2 Others v. State of U.P and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Noor Jahan and 2 Others 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rajan Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Prakash Vs State of U.P.

Siraj Ahmad Vs State of U.P. and Another

Pappu Vs State of U.P. and Another

Yogendra Giri and Another Vs State of U.P.

Smt. Sushma Vs State of U.P.