Allowed

Dr. Mohammad Ajmal v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC3 Jun 2022ABAIL/4655/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court granted anticipatory bail to Dr. Mohammad Ajmal charged under Sections 15 (2) and 15 (3) of the Indian Medical Act 1956. The court evaluated the FIR and the applicant's reply, citing Sushila Aggarwal, and found grounds satisfied without expressing a final opinion on the merits of the underlying allegations regarding illegal practice.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted on personal bond and two sureties subject to conditions regarding interrogation, witness interference, and passport deposit.

Dr. Mohammad Ajmal Vs State of U.P. — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 48

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 4655 of 2022

¶3

Applicant : Dr. Mohammad Ajmal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Parvez Alam,Namit Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ali Zamin,J.

¶5

Heard over anticipatory bail application, under Section 438 Cr.P.C., moved by the applicant, in Case Crime No.0735 of 2021, under Sections 15 (2), 15 (3) Indian Medical Act 1956, Police Station Kotwali Shahar, District Bijnor.

¶6

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that according to the FIR version notice was issued on 3.10.2021 to the effect that applicant is running an allopathic clinic without registration and reply was sought for the next day i.e. 4.10.2021 but no such notice was served upon him and on the basis of information through newspaper he submitted reply on 26.10.2021 stating therein that applicant was registered on 23.4.2016 having Registration No.D.A.U.O./BJO/39A/2021-22, which was continuously renewed and as per page no.33 of the bail application its validity was extended till 31.3.2022. He next submits that without consideration of the reply this FIR has been lodged. He further submits that as per allegation applicant was running an illegal allopathic clinic. He next submits that applicant has no criminal history. He Further submits that applicant has been falsely implicated in the case, hence, this anticipatory bail application with above prayer.

¶7

Learned A.G.A. opposed the anticipatory bail prayer of the applicant by submitting that as per paper no.31 applicant did not practice from 31.3.2018 but as per statement of witness Naim he was practicing at the time of the incident also and after investigation charge-sheet has been submitted against the applicant, therefore, he is not entitled for bail.

¶8

Having heard and gone through material placed on record, registration of the applicant clinic at the time of lodging of the FIR, FIR was lodged on 30.10.2021 and reply was submitted on 26.10.2021 and law laid down by Hon'ble Apex Court in the Case of Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi) 2020 SCC Online SC 98 and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, ground for grant of anticipatory bail is made out.

¶9

It is directed that, in case of arrest, the applicant Dr. Mohammad Ajmal be enlarged on anticipatory bail in above case crime number during pendency of the trial before the competent court on furnishing personal bond and two sureties each of like amount to the satisfaction of Station House Officer of police station/court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶10

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

¶11

(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;

¶12

(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.

¶13

In default of any of the conditions, the Investigating Officer/Government Advocate is at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of interim anticipatory bail granted to the applicant.

¶14

The Investigating Officer will continue with the investigation, if it is in progress and will not be affected by this order.

¶15

A copy of this order shall also be produced before the S.P/S.S.P concerned by the applicant, within a week, if the investigation is still in progress, who shall ensure compliance of this order.

¶16

This anticipatory bail application is allowed.

¶17

Order Date :- 3.6.2022

¶18

m.a.

¶19

Digitally signed by MOHAMMAD AYYUB Date: 2022.06.03 18:05:56 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Dr. Mohammad Ajmal v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dr. Mohammad Ajmal 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

Chandra Pal Vs State of U.P. and Another

Seraj @ Sonu Vs State of U.P.

Bharat Lal and 2 Others Vs State of U.P and Another

Vijay @ Love Yadav Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Unis Khan Vs State of U.P. and Another

Neeraj Sharma@ Naresh Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others