Allowed

Mukhtaruzzaman Khan v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC10 Oct 2022BAIL/26329/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed bail for the applicant accused under the IPC in a case involving allegations of property forgery. The dispute arose from a family property settlement, with prior civil proceedings pending. The Court granted bail subject to conditions on furnishing a personal bond and sureties.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail subject to personal bond and two sureties of the like amount and undertaking not to tamper with evidence or witnesses.

Mukhtaruzzaman Khan Vs State of U.P. — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 79

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 26329 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Mukhtaruzzaman Khan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Suresh Kumar Maurya,Prabhat Kumar Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Amit Upadhyay

¶4

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶5

1.Heard Sri Suresh Kumar Maurya, the learned counsel for the applicant, Sri D.K. Srivastava, the learned A.G.A. for the State, Shri Amit Upadhyay, the learned counsel for the informant and perused the record.

¶6

2.The present bail application has been filed by the applicant with the prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 0300 of 2020, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C., P.S. Civil Lines, District Meerut.

¶7

3.The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged by the wife of the informant's deceased brother, alleging that the applicant had prepared a forged family settlement allegedly executed by the applicant's father whereby he had partitioned his property between the applicant and his deceased brother.

¶8

Prior to lodging of the present F.I.R. the informant had filed a civil suit regarding the property in question and the informant's deceased father had filed a written statement admitting her claims and the suit was decided on the basis of the compromise on 17-01-2018.

¶9

The applicant had filed a Suit No. 891 of 2019 regarding the same property and the informant had filed an application under Order 7 Rule 11 C.P.C., which has been allowed by means of an order dated 23-01-2020.

¶10

The applicant has challenged the aforesaid order by filing a petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India bearing No. 330 of 2020 in this Court.

¶11

7.It has been averred in the affidavit filed in support of the bail application that the applicant is an innocent person, he has been falsely implicated in the case, he is having no previous criminal history and he is in jail since 08-05-2022.

¶12

The learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the dispute which has led to filing of an F.I.R. is inherently of a civil nature.

¶13

The learned counsel for the informant has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail.

¶14

10.Having considered the aforesaid facts and submissions and keeping in view the fact that the applicant as well as the informants are the descendants of a common ancestor and there are disputes regarding the properties left by their ancestor, which are purely of a civil nature and regarding which civil proceedings are pending and also keeping in view the fact that the applicant has no criminal history, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail pending conclusion of the trial. The bail application is accordingly allowed.

¶15

11.Let the applicant - Mukhtaruzzaman Khan be released on bail in Case Crime No. 0300 of 2020, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C., P.S. Civil Lines, District Meerut on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:-

¶16

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶17

(ii) The applicant will not influence any witness.

¶18

(iii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶19

(iv) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶20

12.In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move an application bail before this Court seeking cancellation of bail.

¶21

Order Date :- 10.10.2022

¶22

pks

¶23

Digitally signed by PANKAJ KUMAR SRIVASTAVA Date: 2022.10.11 09:44:08 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Mukhtaruzzaman Khan v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mukhtaruzzaman Khan 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Anuj @ Karu Vs State of U.P.

Suneel Vs State of U.P.

Jitendra @ Jitendra Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P.

Gurmehar Singh Chima Vs State of U.P.

Basant Lal Vs State of U.P.

Ram Rekha Singh Vs State of U.P.