Dismissed

Rahis Mohammad and 2 Others v. State of U.P and Another

Allahabad HC20 Jan 2023ABAIL/13108/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Three applicants sought anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in a criminal case involving an FIR alleging an assault. The single-judge bench examined the facts, noted the existence of a cross-version, and held that the matter was not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail application rejected; it was held not a fit case to grant bail.

Rahis Mohammad and 2 Others Vs State of U.P and Another — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 85

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 13108 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Rahis Mohammad And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Geetam Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Mrs. Jyotsna Sharma,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Geetam Singh, learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the papers on record.

¶6

The present application has been moved on behalf of the applicantsRahis Mohammad, Amjad and Mushir seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.273 of 2022, under sections- 323, 504, 506, 307 I.P.C., Police Station- Ganjdundwara, District- Kasganj.

¶7

As per prosecution case, the present applicants Rahis Mohammad, Mushir and Amjad along with one more Kamil were lying in wait for one Faizan; finding Faizan going from the place, Kamil fired at him and Faizan sustained injury on his leg. On the basis of this, the F.I.R. has been lodged and the matter is being investigated.

¶8

It is contended on behalf of the applicants that the role of firing at the lone injured is assigned to Kamil, who is non-applicant; at the most against the present applicant offence under sections 323 I.P.C. is made out; there is nothing to show that the present applicants shared any common intention with the main assailant Kamil. It is further contended that from the side of the applicants one Naeem who happens from the same family, filed an F.I.R. being Case Crime No.274 of 2022, under sections 147, 148, 149 and 307 I.P.C. showing taking of incident at the same time and place with the allegation that four persons from the side of the instant first informant along with 5-10 unknown persons all of sudden attacked Raisuddeen with a sharp edged weapon and he sustained incised wound on his left hand, they also fired upon Faizan but he was saved. It is said that the instant F.I.R. has been filed in retaliation with concocted facts. My attention has also been drawn to an F.I.R. lodged about five days prior to instant F.I.R. being Case Crime No.0265 of 2022, dated 2.11.2022. It is contended on behalf of the present applicants that they have been implicated out of enmity.

¶9

The anticipatory bail application is opposed by the learned A.G.A. for the State with the contention that filing of a cross version of the same incident prima-facie shows that a criminal incident actually took place and that this is sufficient to rule out probability of false implication; the facts and circumstances as disclosed by the papers submitted on behalf of the applicants themselves indicate that there have been strained relations between the two sides and present incident is culmination of the same.

¶10

While considering the anticipatory bail, it may be kept in mind that it is an extraordinary remedy to be exercised in suitable cases only. The powers under section 438 Cr.P.C. cannot be utilized in a routine manner and definitely as a substitute for regular bail. This discretionary power calls for

¶11

existence of facts of the kind where the court is satisfied that its interference is necessary to further the cause of justice and to prevent misuse of process of law.

¶12

In view of above, I do not find it a fit case to grant benefit of anticipatory bail.

¶13

Hence the anticipatory bail application is rejected .

¶14

However, any of the observations made herein shall not be taken as a comment on merits of the case and the court below shall be at liberty to form its own opinion at any stage of the case.

¶15

Order Date :- 20.1.2023 Gaurav/Saif

¶16

Digitally signed by :- GAURAV PATEL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Rahis Mohammad and 2 Others v. State of U.P and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rahis Mohammad and 2 Others v. State of U.P and Another

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

Goldi Vs State of U.P. and Another

Munni Devi and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Sant Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Amar Singh Vs State of U.P.

Shamim Khan Vs State of U.P and Another

Sanjeev Gautam Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others