Allowed

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

Allahabad HC25 Jan 2023ABAIL/12111/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment grants anticipatory bail to three relatives of a co-accused under Section 438 Cr.P.C. pending investigation for offences including cruelty and forgery. The court granted bail conditioned on personal bond and availability for interrogation.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted till submission of police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. upon furnishing personal bond of Rs. 25,000 with two sureties and complying with specific conditions.

Mohammad Ayub @ Ayub Hashmi and 2 Others Vs State of… — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 80

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 12111 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Mohammad Ayub @ Ayub Hashmi And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Yashpal Yadav,Ravindra Kumar Yadav

¶4

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Siddharth Srivastava

¶5

Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicants as well as learned counsel for the opposite party alongwith learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record.

¶7

This anticipatory bail application (under section 438 Cr.P.C.) has been moved seeking bail in Case Crime No.362 of 2022, under sections 323, 504, 506, 498A 420, 342 I.P.C., Police Station Sidhari, District Azamgargh, during the pendency of investigation.

¶8

Facts in brief are that the informant was wedded to co-accused Gufran Hashmi and the present applicants namely Mohd. Ayub Hashmi, Nisha Hashmi and Shakina Bano are father, mother and bhahbi of the co-accused Gufran Hashmi. The allegation against these applicants is that they dragged the victim from their house by catching her hair.

¶9

It is submitted that in this case there was dispute between Gufran Hashmi and the informant who are said to be husband and wife but these applicants being relatives of Gufran Hashmi have been involved in this case with false allegations. No any offence has been committed by these applicants with the informant. There is no any evidence on record to show that these applicants also committed the incident as alleged by the informant/victim. It is also submitted that the informant was not legally wedded to Gufran Hashmi but only for making pressure against him to marry she lodged this false F.I.R. Since the investigation is going, therefore, the applicants are under apprehension of imminent arrest. In case, the applicants are released on bail, they would not misuse the liberty of bail and would cooperate with the investigation.

¶10

Learned counsel for the opposite party as well as learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail and urged that in this case the victim was dragged away from the house of these applicants, therefore, they cannot be said to be innocent.

¶11

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, from the perusal of record and without making any comment on the merit of the case, the applicants are 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 of the applicants- Mohammad @ Ayub Hashmi, Shakina Bano @ Shakina Hashmi & Nisha @ Anisha Khatoon @ Nisha Hashmi , 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:-

¶13

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

¶14

(ii) The applicants 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;

¶15

(iii) The applicants shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court and if they have passport, the same shall be deposited by them 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 applicants.

¶17

Order Date :- 25.1.2023 Ashok Gupta

¶18

Digitally signed by :- ASHOK KUMAR GUPTA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

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

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

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

Arbaz Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Islam Khan Vs State of U.P. and Another