Allowed

Tahsin Begum and 2 Ors. v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC18 Jan 2023ABAIL/2089/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this Criminal Miscellaneous Application under Section 438 CrPC, the Allahabad High Court granted unconditional anticipatory bail to three female applicants accused of multiple offences. The court discharged its hearing over time, considering arguments that the impugned order was interim and no charges had been framed at the time of the interim order. The final order grants bail on furnishing a

What did the court decide?

The applicants are released on anticipatory bail till the conclusion of the trial upon furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000 and two sureties in the like amount.

Tahsin Begum and 2 Ors. Vs State of U.P. — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 77

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 2089 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Tahsin Begum And 2 Ors Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- D.M.Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.

¶5

Heard Mr. D.M. Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicants and Mr. Pankaj Srivastava, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record.

¶6

The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicants in Case Crime No.724 of 2019, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 341, 323, 224, 225, 336, 504, 506, 333, 332, 353 I.P.C & Section 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act, Police Station-Dhoomanganj, District-Prayagaraj, with a prayer to enlarge them on anticipatory bail.

¶7

On 28.02.2020, the following order was passed:-

¶8

"Heard Sri D.M.Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri B. A. Khan, learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶9

This anticipatory bail application has been moved seeking bail in Case Crime No. 724 of 2019, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 341, 323, 224, 225, 336, 504, 506, 33, 332, 353 I.P.C. and under Section 7 of Criminal Law Amendment Act, Police Station Dhoomanganj, District Prayagraj (Allahabad), during the pendency of trial.

¶10

As per the F.I.R., the informant who is a Sub-Inspector had gone to place of occurrence in order to arrest the accused of Case Crime No. 210 of 2019, under Section 3/5/8 of Cow Slaughter Act and Section 11 of Animal Cruelty Act and when the accused of the aforesaid case namely, Nurain was arrested, the accused applicants who are named in the F.I.R. along with other co-accused who are not named in the F.I.R., are said to have got the said accused freed from the custody of police and in the process they are stated to have assaulted the police party by lathi-danda and even firing was also made.

¶11

The submission of the learned counsel for the applicants are that the accused applicants have been falsely implicated in the present case; they have not been assigned any specific role; no injury is caused to anyone. The co-accused namely, Hasnain, Mahtab Alam, Mohd. Aasif and Mohd. Sabir @ Sakib have already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court. copies of orders have been annexed at page nos. 54 to 57 of the paper book. They are apprehending imminent arrest by the police.They have no criminal history. If released on bail they would not misuse the liberty and would co-operate with the investigation.

¶12

Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for granting anticipatory bail to the accused applicant.

¶13

List this case on 20.04.2020, and by the said date, counter affidavit be filed from the side of learned A.G.A.

¶14

Taking into consideration the gravity of accusation, there being no criminal antecedents of the applicant and there being no possibility of his fleeing from justice, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the applicant is entitled to be released on interim anticipatory bail in this case.

¶15

In the event of arrest of the applicant Tahsin Begum, Rohi and Roofiya involved in Case Crime No. 724 of 2019, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 341, 323, 224, 225, 336, 504, 506, 33, 332, 353 I.P.C. and under Section 7 of Criminal Law Amendment Act, Police Station Dhoomanganj, District Prayagraj (Allahabad), he shall be released on interim anticipatory bail during investigation till the date fixed, on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 25,000/with two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the police station concerned on the on the following conditions:

¶16

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

¶17

2. 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 them from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence;

¶18

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

¶19

4. that in default of any of the conditions mentioned above, the investigating officers shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicants."

¶20

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that applicants are ladies and no injury has been caused to anyone in the alleged incident. He further submits that charge sheet has been filed on 20.04.2020. The applicants have always cooperated in the investigation and have not misused the liberty of aforesaid interim anticipatory bail, which was granted to them on 28.02.2020 till submission of charge sheet by co-ordinate bench of this Court. He further submits that applicants have no criminal history. Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicants to demonstrate the falsity of the allegation made against them. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicants have also been touched upon length. Learned counsel for the applicants undertakes that they have co-operated in the investigation and are ready to do so in trial also failing which the State can move appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail.

¶21

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the anticipatory bail application but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicants.

¶22

On due consideration to the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the applicants as well as learned A.G.A. and considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of the applicants, the applicants are liable to to be enlarged on anticipatory bail in view of the judgment of Supreme Court in the case of "Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi), (2020) 5 SCC 1" . The future contingencies regarding the anticipatory bail being granted to applicants shall also be taken care of as per the aforesaid judgment of the Apex Court.

¶23

In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicants is allowed .

¶24

Let the accused-applicants- Tahsin Begum, Rohi and Roofiya be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on anticipatory bail till the conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the Police Station concerned/Court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶25

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

¶26

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 them from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence;

¶27

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

¶28

that in case charge-sheet is submitted the applicants shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial;

¶29

that the applicants shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;

¶30

that the applicants shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;

¶31

that in case of breach of any of the above conditions the court below shall have the liberty to cancel the bail.

¶32

It is made clear that observations made hereinabove are exclusively for deciding the instant anticipatory bail application and shall not affect the trial.

¶33

Order Date :- 18.1.2023 Rahul.

¶34

Digitally signed by :- RAHUL GOSWAMI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Tahsin Begum and 2 Ors. v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tahsin Begum and 2 Ors. 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

Ikrar and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Chandra Shekhar and Another Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Anuj Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Sanjay Singh and 16 Others Vs State of U.P.

Ramesh Kumar Pal and 2 Others Vs State of U.P.

Jitendra Yadav and Anr. Vs State of U.P.