Allowed

Arman Ali v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC17 Nov 2022BAIL/51556/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is a bail application before the Allahabad High Court in a case involving unlawful conversion of religion under the U.P. Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act and the IPC. The court allowed the application, granting bail subject to strict conditions regarding court appearances.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties subject to strict conditions of attendance.

Arman Ali Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 90

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 51556 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Arman Ali Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Syed Naqi Imam Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Shiv Shanker Prasad,J.

¶5

Heard Mr. Syed Nagi Imam learned counsel for the applicant, Mr. Amit Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the State as well as perused the entire material available on record.

¶6

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant-Arman Ali with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Crime No. 408 of 2022, under Sections 365, 342, 420 I.P.C. and Sections 3, 5 (1) of U.P. Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, Police Station-Kotwali, DistrictFatehpur, during the pendency of trial.

¶7

The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged against six named accused persons, including the applicant, alleging that they are involved in forcing people to convert their religion.

¶8

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that perusal of first information report indicates that there is no active role attributed to the applicant for alleged crime. Only role attributed to applicant to change victim's religion. It is further submitted that there is no allegation in the FIR that the applicant has done any act, which may amount to any person to convert the religion.

¶9

It is then submitted that the co-accused, namely, Mohsin, Yaseen, Alim and Yaseen Mansoori @ Gulam Yaseen Mansoori have already been enlarged on bail by different Coordinate Benches of this Court, their bail orders have been enclosed as Annexure-3 to the afÏdavit accompanying the present bail application. The case of the present applicant is similar and identical to that of the aforesaid co-accused. As such the present applicant is liable to be enlarged on bail. The applicant has no criminal antecedents to his credit except the present one. It is next contended that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses and in case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail. The applicant is in jail since 29th September, 2022.

¶10

Per contra learned A.G.A. and the learned counsel for the complainant have opposed the bail prayer of the applicant but they could not dispute the factual submissions as

¶11

urged by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶12

Considering the nature of the offence, provision for initiation of cases and release the accused, material/evidence brought on record, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, as well as the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Versus State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22, let the applicant involved in aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions:-

¶13

(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶14

(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶15

(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶16

(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufÏcient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶17

It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of the bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case.

¶18

(Shiv Shanker Prasad, J.)

¶19

Order Date :- 17.11.2022

¶20

Sushil/-

¶21

Digitally signed by SUSHIL KUMAR SINGH Date: 2022.11.19 09:57:36 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Arman Ali v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arman Ali 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

Sonu Vs State of U.P.

Abhishek Vs State of U.P.

Babban Qureshi Vs State of U.P.

Mohammad Afzaal @ Monu Rathaur Vs State of U.P.

Deepak Kami Vs State of U.P.

Sintu Vs State of U.P.