Allowed

Masoom Ali @ Syed Masoom Mehdi v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC25 Jan 2023ABAIL/12032/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court allowed anticipatory bail to the applicant under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for the period until the submission of the police report under Section 173(2), subject to furnishing a personal bond and specific conditions regarding interrogation and conduct.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted until submission of police report under S. 173(2) Cr.P.C. on furnishing personal bond of Rs. 25,000 with two sureties in Rs. 25,000 each.

Masoom Ali @ Syed Masoom Mehdi Vs State of U.P. — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 80

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 12032 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Masoom Ali @ Syed Masoom Mehdi Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Zia Uddin Ahmad,Mumtaj Ansari,Prabha Shanker Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, 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.86 of 2022, under sections 411, 413, 414, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C., Police Station Attarsuiya, District Prayagraj.

¶7

Facts in brief are that on 4.6.2022 at about 5.40 P.M. co-accused Mohd. Vaish, Mohd. Tariq and Asad Kantak were caught by the police with stolen motorcycles bearing forged number plates. This applicant is said to have assisted in disposing the stolen motorcycles.

¶8

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that he is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. There is no evidence on record to show the complicity of this applicant except the confessional statement of co-accused Mohd. Tariq. Further submitted that he has committed no offence. This applicant is brother-in-law of co-accused Mohd. Tariq that is the reason he has been implicated in this case by the police. Further submitted that mother-in-law of this applicant is Sazida Begam who filed a Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 5913 of 2022 because she was being harassed by the police and this applicant being related to her, was making paravi of that case that was the reason he has been roped in this case by the police for creating undue pressure. There is no criminal history shown against this applicant in previous case but after roping in present case, his involvement in other cases have also been shown by the police. Lastly, it is submitted that investigation is going on, therefore, the applicant is under apprehension of imminent arrest. In case, he is released on bail, he would not misuse the liberty of bail and would cooperate with the investigation.

¶9

Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail.

¶10

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A., the perusal of record and without commenting on the merits of the case, 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.

¶11

In the event of arrest of the applicant- Masoom Ali @ Syed Masoom Mehdi , shall be released on anticipatory bail till the submission of police report, if any, under section 173 (2) Cr.P.C., on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the police station concerned with the following conditions:-

¶12

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

¶13

(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 office;

¶14

(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.

¶15

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.

¶16

Order Date :- 25.1.2023 A. Singh

¶17

Digitally signed by :- ANURAG SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Masoom Ali @ Syed Masoom Mehdi v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Masoom Ali @ Syed Masoom Mehdi 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

Harveer Singh (Minor) Vs State of U.P.

Taj Mohammad @ Badruddin Vs State of U.P.

Bablu @ Mohammad Hasan Vs State of U.P. and Another

Mohammad Ayub @ Ayub Hashmi and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Arbaz Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Islam Khan Vs State of U.P. and Another