Allowed

Mohd. Hafeez @ Anas v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Allahabad HC16 Jan 2023/781/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal bail application filed by Mohd. Hafeez alias Anas in Case Crime No. 211 of 2022 arising under various sections of the IPC and IT Act. The applicant alleged false implication and submitted that he was the complainant in a prior counter-case which had been treated as a complaint. The court considered the medico-legal report and prior litigation history.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail on personal bond and two sureties with conditions to not tamper with evidence or influence witnesses.

Mohd. Hafeez @ Anas Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin… — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 23

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 781 of 2023

¶3

Applicant :- Mohd. Hafeez @ Anas Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Santosh Kumar Jha,Neeraj Kumar Baghel Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Santosh Kumar Jha, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Ran Vijay Singh, learned Addl. Government Advocate for the State, and perused the records.

¶6

The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant Hafeez alias Anas S/o Sri Nafees on bail in Case Crime No. 211 of 2022 under sections 323, 328, 406, 506, 377 I.P.C. and 66 I.T. Act, P.S. Para, District Lucknow.

¶7

The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an application under section 156(3) CrPC filed by the informant on 17.1.2022 alleging that the applicant developed friendship with him, who is a person of the third gender, and he committed misdeeds with the informant and extracted Rs.35000/- from him. When the informant demanded refund of his money, the applicant threatened to defame him by posting objectionable photos and videos on the internet and alleged objectionable photograph, which was used by the applicant to blackmail the informant, has been annexed with the complaint, which shows two persons sitting near each other and it does not prima facie appear to be obscene in any manner.

¶8

In the affidavit filed in support of the bail application it has been stated that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further alleged therein that prior to filling of the application under section 156(3) CrPC by the informant, on 30th of November 2021 the applicant had filed an application under section 156(3) CrPC against the informant stating that during lock-down in the year 2020 the applicant had developed friendship with the informant and on 19.05.2021 the informant took the applicant to Charbagh and he offered some cold-drink to the applicant. After consuming the cold drink the applicant got in inebriated; that the informant took the applicant to a hotel and while the applicant was unconscious, the informant made an objectionable video and thereafter he threatened the applicant that he would virally spread the video, unless the applicant pays him Rs. 50000/-. The application under section 156(3 ), Cr.P.C. filed by the applicant was allowed by means of an order dated

¶9

15th of January 2022 and the application was ordered to be treated as a 'complaint'.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the present application under section 156(3) CrPC has been filed subsequent to the applicant's application under section 156(3) CrPC registered as a 'Complaint', as a counter-blast and the allegations levelled in the complaint are false.

¶11

The medico-legal examination report of the informant annexed with the affidavit mentions "No mark of injury, no complaint of pain. No marks of any fresh injury/scars seen at Anus."

¶12

Per contra , Sri Ran Vijay Singh, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail-application and he has submitted that in the statement of the Doctor recorded during investigation he has stated that during examination an old cut mark was found on the anus of the informant.

¶13

Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the fact that the applicant had filed an application under section 156(3) Cr.P.C. on 30.11.2021, which was allowed and a Complaint was registered on 15.1.2022; that the informant has filed an application under section 156(3) Cr.P.C. on 17.1.2022, i.e., two days after the applicant's complaint was registered; that the photograph annexed by the informant with his application under section 156(3) Cr.P.C. does not appear to be obscene and the medicolegal examination report of the informant mentions no mark of injury and no mark of any fresh injury/scar on his anus and also the fact that the applicant has no criminal history and without making any observation which may affect the merits of the case, I am of the view that the aforesaid facts are sufficient for making out a case for enlargement of the applicant on bail. The bail-application is allowed .

¶14

Let the applicant Hafeez alias Anas S/o Sri Nafees be released on bail in Case Crime No. 211 of 2022 under sections 323, 328, 406, 506, 377 I.P.C. and 66 I.T. Act, P.S. Para, District Lucknow, on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties, each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below, subject to the following conditions:-

¶15

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

¶16

(ii) The applicant will not influence any witness.

¶17

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

¶18

(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/any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶19

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

¶20

( Subhash Vidyarthi, J. )

¶21

Order Date :- 16.1.2023/A.Nigam

¶22

Digitally signed by :- ANUJ NIGAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Mohd. Hafeez @ Anas v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd. Hafeez @ Anas v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

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

Alka @ Jyoti Dwivedi @ Jyoti Devi Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and Another

Shubham Patel and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and Another

Ranjeet Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and 2 Others

Shiv Shanker and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Civil Sectt. Lko

Sumeri Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko.

Virendra @ Vakeel Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.