Court allowed anticipatory bail application filed by Zakir under Section 438 CrPC, citing false implication and lack of criminal history, conditioning release on compliance of specific requirements.
Anticipatory bail granted to Zakir on personal bond of Rs. 25,000 and two sureties of like amount subject to specific conditions.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 49
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 2498 of 2022
Applicant :- Zakir Opposite Party :- State Of U.P And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Vivek Dhaka Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.
Heard Sri Vivek Dhaka, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Pankaj Kumar Tripathi, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.
The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of applicant Zakir under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, with a prayer to grant anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 155 of 2021 for offence punishable under Sections 323, 504, 506, 452, 324, 308 of the Indian Penal Code, registered at Police Station-Lisari Gate, District-Meerut, till the conclusion of the trial, after rejecting the anticipatory bail application of the applicant by Sessions Judge, Meerut vide order dated 08.02.2022.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. It is further argued that applicant is real brother of the first informant. First information report has been lodged under Sections 354, 354 (G), 504, 452, 323, 307, 506 I.P.C. and 11/12 POCSO Act against applicant and other three named persons. As per the allegations of the first information report, the applicant molested his real sister aged about 16 years. On 10.03.2021, he hold her hand forcibly. At about 10:00 P.M. in the same night, applicant and co-accused persons entered into the house of the first informant and committed marpeet. In this incident, brother-in-law of the first informant Najim was assaulted by the applicant by rod which is turned down as axe. It is further submitted that first information report has been lodged after about 1 month and 12 days of the incident. As per medical report of the Najim, two incised wounds were found on his skull, which have not been probably sustained by a rod. It is further submitted that real sister of the first informant has not supported the prosecution case in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. The applicant is no more required for custodial interrogation. The applicant has no criminal history and he has not undergone any imprisonment after conviction by any court of law in relation to any
cognizable offence previously. It is further contended that the applicant is ready to participate in the investigation. The applicant was granted interim anticipatory bail by this Court on 6.5.2022.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the applicant, but could not point out anything adverse against the applicant.
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.
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.
In case of arrest, the applicant, Zakir 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:-
(i) The applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by the police officer as and when required, if investigation is in progress;
(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;
(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;
(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 ;
(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.
The Investigating Officer will continue with the investigation, if it is in progress and will not be affected by this order.
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.
With the aforesaid directions, the present Anticipatory Bail Application is allowed.
Order Date :- 3.6.2022 T. Sinha
Digitally signed by TRIPTI SINHA Date: 2022.06.10 12:10:43 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
1 issue framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the applicant in the given facts.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)Referred¶11
Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC Online SC 98 · Who else cites this
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Zakir
State Of U.P
Sanjay Kumar Pachori
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
