Allowed

Fakruddin v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC17 Aug 2022ABAIL/5097/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court considered an application for anticipatory bail in a complaint case involving alleged assault and abuse. The court held that a prima facie case for anticipatory bail was made out, considering the nature of accusation and applicant's lack of antecedents, subject to the grant of a personal bond and conditions.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted subject to a personal bond of Rs. 50,000 with two sureties and compliance with standard conditions.

Fakruddin Vs State of U.P. and Another — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 75

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 5097 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Fakruddin Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Pushpendra Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J.

¶5

Supplementary affidavit filed in Court today, is taken on record. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶6

The present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Complaint Case No. 0179 of 2021, (Deviram v. Fakruddin & Ors.), under Sections 323, 324, 504, 506, 354B, 392 I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Bulandshahr with the prayer that in the event of arrest, applicant may be released on bail.

¶7

It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and he has an apprehension that he may be arrested in the above-mentioned case, whereas there is no credible evidence against him. The complainant has lodged the complaint against applicant and his two sons and one other alleging that on 06.11.2019 at 5.30 PM at Bhur Chauraha, Bulandshahr, they have abused and assaulted the complainant and his wife and they have also torn clothes of his wife. It was also alleged that accused persons have also fired a shot, however, complainant and his wife escaped. Learned counsel submitted that applicant has been summoned in a complaint case. The allegation that applicant along with his two sons would indulge in any such incident and that too in mid of town is thoroughly improbable. In fact earlier the applicant has lodged an FIR vide crime no. 22 of 2019 on 12.01.2019 against

¶8

the complainant of this case and in that matter complainant has remained in jail for long and that the complaint of this case has been lodged as a counterblast of the said case with intention to exert undue pressure upon the complainant. Earlier, the complainant has filed one more complaint, which was dismissed and after that the complaint of this case has been lodged concocting a false story. In the alleged incident, no one has sustained any injury. Applicant has no criminal antecedents. The applicant undertake to co-operate during trial and he would appear as and when required by the Court. It has been stated that in case, applicant is granted anticipatory bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and will co-operate during trial and would obey all conditions of bail.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the application for anticipatory bail.

¶10

It may be stated that in case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra , (2011) 1 SCC 694, it has been held by Hon'ble Supreme Court that while deciding anticipatory bail, Court must consider nature and gravity of accusation, antecedent of accused, possibility of accused to flee from justice and that Court must evaluate entire available material against the accused carefully and that the exact role of the accused has also to be taken into consideration.

¶11

In the instant case, considering the settled principles of law regarding anticipatory bail, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, nature of accusation, role of applicants and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on merit of the case, a case for anticipatory bail is made out.

¶12

The anticipatory bail application is allowed .

¶13

In the event of arrest of the applicant Fakruddin in the

¶14

aforesaid case crime, he shall be released on anticipatory bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below concerned with the following conditions :-

¶15

(i) the applicant shall appear before the court below on the date fixed by that court and he shall not seek unwarranted adjournments and would co-operate in trial;

¶16

(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 him/her/them from disclosing such facts to the Court;

¶17

(iii) the applicant would co-operate during trial and would not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶18

In default of any of the conditions, the complainant/prosecution shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant.

¶19

Order Date :- 17.8.2022 Anand

¶20

Digitally signed by ANAND VERMA Date: 2022.08.18 16:17:02 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Fakruddin v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Fakruddin 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

Ikrar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Govind Vs State of U.P. and Another

Varun Vs State of U.P.

Smt. Jyoti and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Dr. Karna Gupta and 2 Others Vs State of U.P.

Chandra Bhushan Singh Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others