Allowed

Mohammad Iqram v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC20 Jun 2022ABAIL/5181/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court granted anticipatory bail to the applicant in a criminal case alleging cheating and criminal conspiracy. The application allowed the applicant to be released upon arrest under a personal bond and sureties for a specific period, subject to standard conditions regarding appearance and non-interference.

What did the court decide?

The applicant is entitled to release on anticipatory bail from the filing of FIR until the submission of the charge sheet, subject to the conditions laid down in the judgment.

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

¶1

Court No. - 44

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 5181 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Mohammad Iqram Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rabindra Bahadur Singh,Imran Khan,Narendra Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant; Sri Imran Khan, who has filed Vakalatnama on behalf of opposite party no. 2/informant and learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record.

¶6

This anticipatory bail application (under section 438 Cr.P.C.) has been moved seeking bail in Case Crime No. 980 of 2021 under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 471, 504 and 506 I.P.C., P.S. Civil Lines, District Moradabad.

¶7

Counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is not named in the F.I.R.; he has been falsely implicated in the present case; coaccused, namely, Mohd. Abrar has been granted bail by coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 31.05.2022 passed in Crl. Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application No. 4190 of 2022, therefore, applicant is also entitled to bail on the ground of parity; the applicant has no criminal history. Lastly, it is submitted that the applicant is apprehensive of imminent arrest. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he would not misuse the liberty of bail and would cooperate with the investigation.

¶8

Learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the informant have opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the applicant with the contention that the applicant is not entitled for anticipatory bail as prima facie case is made out. The apprehension of the applicant is not founded on any material on record, only on the basis of imaginary fear, the anticipatory bail cannot be granted.

¶9

After considering the rival submissions, this court finds that there is a case registered against the applicant. It cannot be definitely said when the police may apprehend him. After the lodging of FIR, the arrest can be made by the police at will. There is no definite period fixed for the police to arrest an accused against whom an FIR has been lodged. The courts have repeatedly held that arrest should be the last option for the police and it should be restricted to those exceptional cases

¶10

where arresting the accused is imperative or his custodial interrogation is required. Irrational and indiscriminate arrests are gross violation of human rights.

¶11

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusation and antecedents, the applicant is entitled to be released on anticipatory bail in this case for the limited period considering the exception considered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC Online SC 98.

¶12

In the event of arrest, applicant Mohammad Iqram shall be released on anticipatory bail till the submission of charge sheet before the competent Court on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the police station concerned with the following conditions:-

¶13

(i) The applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required.

¶14

(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 from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer.

¶15

(iii) The applicant shall not leave India 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.

¶16

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

¶17

The application stands disposed of .

¶18

Order Date :- 20.6.2022 Meenu

¶19

Digitally signed by MEENU SINGH Date: 2022.06.22 10:09:15 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Mohammad Iqram v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohammad Iqram 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

Priyodeep Halder Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sandeep Singh Faujdar and Another Vs State of U.P.and Another

Ram Kishor and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Prem Pal Mata and Another Vs State of U.P and Another

Irfan Gaddi @ Irfan Vs State of U.P.

Krishna Kumar @ Bheema Vs State of U.P.