Allowed

Shakeel Ahmad v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC9 Dec 2022ABAIL/12540/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court allowed an anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C., relying on the legal principles established in Sushila Aggarwal, noting the lack of criminal history and concerns regarding false implication in a case involving serious offences.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted till conclusion of trial on furnishing personal bond with two sureties, subject to standard conditions including appearance before the court and non-interference with witness

Shakeel Ahmad 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. - 12540 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Shakeel Ahmad Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Wahaj Ahmad Siddiqui Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Wahaj Ahmad Siddiqui, learned counsel for the applicant and Smt. Ladli Pandey, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record.

¶6

The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in F.I.R./Case Crime No. 0292 of 2022, under Sections 452, 323, 307, 506 IPC, Police Station Afzalgarh, District Bijnor, with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.

¶7

As per prosecution story, the applicant along with one Shameem Ahmad and one unknown person are stated to have barged into the house of the informant one day before lodging of the FIR at some unknown time. They are also stated to have attempted to cause the death of the informant by throttling him and are even stated to have causing injury to him.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. The applicant has nothing to do with the said offence as alleged by the prosecution. Learned counsel has further stated that no time of offence is mentioned in the FIR and as per the injury report, the injured person has been examined on 18.10.2022 at about 02:00 PM and the FIR has been lodged on the same day at 02:50 PM. Learned counsel has further stated that the informant/injured is a journalist and has got the said FIR registered under his influence as the brother of the applicant had filed an application u/s 156(3) Cr.P.C. against the informant and other persons and an order to register the FIR was passed by the learned A.C.J.M., Nagina on 12.10.2022 and ironically after registration of the FIR as FIR No.292 of 2022, the FIR of the brother of the applicant has been lodged as FIR No.293 of 2022. Learned counsel has further stated that injuries have been manufactured and are self-inflicted. 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

¶9

of the applicant have also been touched upon at length. It is further submitted that the applicant has no criminal antecedents. In case, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed, he will not misuse the liberty and shall cooperate with trial.

¶10

On the other hand, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant and also the fact that the applicant has no criminal history.

¶11

On due consideration to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of " Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC online SC 98 ", the applicant is entitled to be granted anticipatory bail in this case.

¶12

Without expressing any opinion upon ultimate merits of the case either ways which may adversely affect the trial of the case, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed .

¶13

In the event of arrest of the applicant, Shakeel Ahmad involved in the aforesaid case crime number, shall be released on anticipatory bail till the conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Presiding Officer/Court Concerned, with the conditions that:-

¶14

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

¶15

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;

¶16

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

¶17

that the applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial;

¶18

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

¶19

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

¶20

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

¶21

It is made clear that observations made in granting anticipatory bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.

¶22

Order Date :- 9.12.2022 Siddhant

¶23

Digitally signed by SIDDHANT SAHU Date: 2022.12.09 13:59:19 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Shakeel Ahmad v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shakeel Ahmad 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

Sarvesh and Another Vs State of U.P.

Ameer Khan and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Karandeep Singh and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

M.S. Ahluwalia Vs State of U.P. and Another

M.S. Ahluwalia Vs State of U.P. and Another

M.S. Ahluwalia Vs State of U.P. and Another