Allowed

Jumma v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC19 Apr 2023ABAIL/1600/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Appreciating counsel submissions on the phraseology of the application, the Hon'ble High Court directed that the Application be allowed for anticipatory bail till the conclusion of trial in the above case.

What did the court decide?

The application is allowed; the applicant to be released on anticipatory bail upon furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount.

Jumma Vs State of U.P. and Another — Cheque Dishonour | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 84

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 1600 of 2023

¶3

Applicant :- Jumma Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Sanjay Ojha Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA and perused the material available on record.

¶6

This application for anticipatory bail has been filed by applicant- Jumma in connection with Case Crime No. 72 of 2022, under sections 406, 420, 504, 506 IPC, P.S. Didoli, District- Amroha.

¶7

It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and he has apprehension of arrest in the above-mentioned case, whereas there is no credible evidence against him. It is further submitted that no cheque has been issued in favour any person by the present accused applicant and it is alleged in the FIR that the cheques were issued by the co-accused Firoz Alam, which were dishonored by the bank for want of insufficient funds. No specific role in the alleged offence has been assigned against the present accused applicant. It is further submitted that criminal history of two cases against the applicants has been explained in the supplementary affidavit. No specific date has been mentioned in the FIR when allegedly the present accused applicant along with other co-accused persons contacted the informant and the villagers to pursue them for payment of installments for providing some motor cycle by their bank. Allegations levelled against the applicant are false. Charge sheet in the matter has been submitted. In case applicant is granted anticipatory bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and would obey all conditions of bail.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail.

¶9

In Sushila Aggarwal and others vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and another, (2020) 5 SCC 1 , the Hon'ble Apex Court has settled the controversy finally by holding the anticipatory bail need not be of limited duration invariably. In appropriate case, it can continue upto conclusion of trial.

¶10

It has been further held therein that anticipatory bail granted can, depending on the conduct and behavior of the accused, continue after filing of the charge sheet till end of trial.

¶11

It has been further held by the Hon'ble Apex Court that while considering an application for grant of anticipatory bail, the court has to consider the nature of the offence, the role of the person, the likelihood of his influencing the course of investigation, or tampering with evidence including intimidating witnesses, llikelihood of fleeing justice, such as leaving the country, etc. It has further been held that Courts ought to be generally guided by considerations such as the nature and gravity of the offences, the role attributed to the applicant, and the facts of the case, while considering whether to grant anticipatory bail, or refuse it. Whether to grant or not is a matter of discretion.

¶12

Hence, considering the settled principles of law regarding anticipatory bail, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, nature of accusation, role of applicant and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion of the merits of the case, in my view, it is a fit case for anticipatory bail to the applicant till conclusion of trial in the matter.

¶13

The anticipatory bail application is allowed .

¶14

In the event of arrest of the applicant in the aforesaid case crime, he shall be released on anticipatory bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions :-

¶15

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 him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶16

The applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶17

The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.

¶18

The applicant shall not leave India without prior permission of the Court and if they have passport, the same shall be deposited by him before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned.

¶19

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the Investigating Officer shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for

¶20

cancellation of anticipatory bail of the applicant in accordance with law.

¶21

Order Date :- 19.4.2023 Fhd

¶22

Digitally signed by :- FAHAD NIYAZ High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Jumma v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jumma 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

Smt Santosh Alias Santaresh and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Smt. Ramkali and Another Vs State of U.P.

Mannu Vs State of U.P. and Another

Vinita Yadav @ Seema Yadav Vs State of U.P. and Another

Muslim Vs State of U.P. and Another

Anuj Vashishth and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another