Allowed

Parveen Begam and Another v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC19 Apr 2022ABAIL/2934/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge allowed the anticipatory bail application of Parveen Begam and Ibrahim Khan against Section 419, 420, 467, 468, and 471 IPC charges alleging revenue record interpolation. Court recorded satisfaction that applicants were made scapegoats and granted bail subject to personal bond and conditions.

What did the court decide?

Protection from arrest granted subject to personal bond of Rs. 50,000 and two sureties, with conditions to appear for interrogation and not leave the district without permission.

Parveen Begam and Another Vs State of U.P. — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 69

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 2934 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Parveen Begam And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Nishant Dwivedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Mohd. Faiz Alam Khan,J.

¶5

Heard Shri Nishant Dwivedi, learned counsel for the applicants as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶6

The instant application has been moved by the applicants- Parveen Begam and Ibrahim Khan in Case Crime No. 392 of 2017, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468 and 471 I.P.C., Police Station Jalesar, District Etah, with the prayer to enlarge them on anticipatory bail.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicants while pressing the anticipatory bail application submits that the applicants have been falsely implicated in this case. The allegations against the applicants are to the tune that they in connivance with revenue officials have been successful in interpolation of the revenue record and have thus gained illegally. However, it has not been specified in the first information report as to what illegal gain has been taken by the instant applicants.

¶8

It is further submitted that the applicants and other co-accused persons are being made scapegoat to screen the main offenders of the alleged crime, who are the revenue authorities working in the relevant tehsil, as none of the revenue officials has been arrayed as an accused person in the first information report.

¶9

It is also submitted that applicants are respectable citizens of the locality and there is no apprehension that after being granted any order in their favour they will flee from the course of law or may otherwise misuse the liberty and they are ready to cooperate in the investigation. They are also not having any criminal history.

¶10

It is next submitted that co-accused persons namely Nar Singh Pal and Smt. Munni standing on the identical footing as of the applicants have been granted protection from arrest by a coordinate Bench of this Court, vide order dated 02.02.2021 passed in Crl. Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application No. 1986 of 2021 and their anticipatory bail application have been allowed.

¶11

Learned A.G.A., however, opposes the prayer of anticipatory bail of the applicant on the ground that the applicants are the beneficiary of the interpolation which has been made in the revenue record with connivance of the revenue officials and, thus, they are not entitled for any protection.have been granted protection from arrest by co-ordinate Benches of this Court.

¶12

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record, it is evident that the allegations against applicants are to the tune that they in connivance with the revenue officials have succeeded to interpolate the revenue record of the tehsil. It is also apparent that none of the revenue officer has been arrayed as the accused in the first information report and it has been vehemently submitted on behalf of the applicants that the applicants and other co-accused persons have been made scapegoat in order to screen the real offenders who are the revenue officials of the concerned Tehsil. Identically placed co-accused persons have also been granted the facility of anticipatory bail.

¶13

Thus, having regard to the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra (2011) 1 SCC 694 as well as in Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi) (2020) 5 SCC 1 and in Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia vs. State of Punjab [(1980) 2 SCC 565 : 1980 SCC (Cri) 561] and keeping in view the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case that, I find sufficient grounds on the basis of which protection from arrest may be granted in favour of the instant applicants.

¶14

Thus, the anticipatory bail application moved by the applicants is finally disposed of with the observation that in the event of arrest of the applicants namely Parveen Begam and Ibrahim Khan involved in the above noted case, they shall be released forthwith on anticipatory bail on their furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the Police Station concerned/ Investigating Officer subject to the following conditions:-

¶15

(1) The applicants shall make himself available for interrogation or for discovery of any fact by a police officer as and when required;

¶16

(2) 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 them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

¶17

(3) The applicants shall not leave the District concerned without the previous permission of the Court.

¶18

Order Date :- 19.4.2022 Praveen

¶19

Digitally signed by PRAVEEN KUMAR Date: 2022.04.19 18:12:43 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Parveen Begam and Another v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Parveen Begam and Another 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

Dilip Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Yusuf @ Kalia @ Yunus Vs State of U.P.

Deepika Shukla @ Nitil Vs State of U.P.

Ajay Kumar Pathak Vs State of U.P. and Another

Narayani Singh and 7 Others Vs State of U.P.

Vimala Devi Vs State of U.P.