Allowed

Irfan Hussain and 2 Others v. State of U.P and Another

Allahabad HC18 Sept 2023ABAIL/13310/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an anticipatory bail application, a single judge of the Allahabad High Court allowed bail to the applicants involved in a criminal case alleging assault, dowry harassment, and attempted murder. The court relied on Sushila Aggarwal and granted bail subject to specific conditions.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail till conclusion of trial furnished with personal bond and two sureties each in like amount.

Irfan Hussain and 2 Others Vs State of U.P and Another — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:179913

¶2

Court No. - 72

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 13310 of 2022

¶4

Applicant :- Irfan Hussain And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rakesh Pati Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Sanjay Singh

¶5

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Rakesh Pati Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Sanjay Singh, learned counsel for the informant as well as Sri Sunil Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and also perused the record.

¶7

The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicants in F.I.R./Case Crime No. 242 of 2022, under Sections 498-A, 307, 323, 504, 506 of IPC and Sections 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Sungarhi, District Pilibhit, with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.

¶8

As per prosecution story, the applicants along with co-accused person are stated to have come to the house of the informant i.e. her parental home and assaulted her thereby causing injuries to her.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicants has stated that the applicants are maliciously being prosecuted in the present case due to ulterior motive and have apprehension of their arrest. They have nothing to do with the said offence as alleged by the prosecution. Learned counsel has further stated that fake story has been cooked up by the informant as it is not possible for them to come all the way from Udhamsingh Nagar, Uttarakhand to Pilibhit and caused injuries to her. In the injury report, the injuries were found to be simple in nature and the same is annexed as Annexure-3 to the supplementary affidavit. Learned counsel has further stated that the matter is of family discord and it is based on fake story. The matter was sent for mediation but the said proceedings have failed.

¶10

Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicants to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against them. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicants have also been touched upon at length. It is further submitted that the applicants have no criminal history. In case, the anticipatory bail application of the applicants is allowed, they will not misuse the liberty and shall cooperate with trial.

¶11

On the other hand, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicants and also the fact that the applicants have no criminal history.

¶12

Considering the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of " Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC online SC 98 ", the applicants are entitled to be granted anticipatory bail in this case.

¶13

Without expressing any opinion upon ultimate merits of the case either ways which may adversely affect the trial of the case, the anticipatory bail application of the applicants is allowed .

¶14

In the event of arrest of the applicants, Irfan Hussain, Smt. Sugara Begum and Ishrat, involved in the aforesaid case crime number, shall be released on anticipatory bail till the conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Presiding Officer/Court Concerned, with the conditions that:-

¶15

i. that the applicants shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

¶16

ii. that 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 him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence;

¶17

iii. that the applicants shall not leave India without previous permission of the court;

¶18

iv. that the applicants shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial; v. that the applicants shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness; vi. that the applicants shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence are exempted;

¶19

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court concerned shall have the liberty to cancel the bail granted to the applicants.

¶20

It is made clear that observations made in granting anticipatory bail to the applicants shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.

¶21

(Justice Krishan Pahal)

¶22

Order Date :- 18.9.2023 Siddhant

¶23

Digitally signed by :- SIDDHANT SAHU High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Irfan Hussain and 2 Others v. State of U.P and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Irfan Hussain 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Surendra Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Bhupendra Vs State of U.P. and Another

Pramod Chauhan Vs State of U.P. and Another

Mehfooj Vs State of U.P.

Rajesh Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Manish Vs State of U.P. and Another