Allowed

Khurshid Khan v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC17 May 2023ABAIL/2231/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court enlarged the applicant on anticipatory bail in a cheating case. The court relied on Supreme Court precedent, noting the applicant was falsely implicated and not named in the FIR, while imposing standard conditions for bail. Application allowed.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted in Crime No.924 of 2022 until conclusion of trial, subject to furnishing personal bond and two sureties.

Khurshid Khan Vs State of U.P. and Another — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:107799

¶2

Court No. - 83

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 2231 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Khurshid Khan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Hasan Parvej Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶6

List has been revised.

¶7

Rejoinder affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record.

¶8

Heard Sri Hasan Parvej, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri R.P. Patel, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record.

¶9

The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No.924 of 2022, registered under Section 420 I.P.C. at Police Station- Chandpur, District Bijnor with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.

¶10

As per prosecution story, one unknown lady is said to have duped the informant to the tune of Rs.4 lakhs by selling fake jewellery to him on 17.12.2022 at about 02:00 p.m.

¶11

Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that he has been falsely implicated in this case. The applicant is not named in the FIR. The FIR was instituted against unknown women and applicant is stated to be the brother of the said unknown lady who was arrested subsequently during the course of the day and was released from the police station in compliance of Section 41-A Cr.P.C. Learned counsel has stated that the applicant has nothing to do with the said offence. His name has come up in the statement of co-accused person, which is not admissible in evidence. The criminal history of one case assigned to the applicant has been explained. Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicant to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against him. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicant have also been touched upon at length. The applicant has apprehension of his arrest. Learned counsel for the applicant

¶12

undertakes that he has co-operated in the investigation and is ready to do so in trial also failing which the State can move appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail.

¶13

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 applicant.

¶14

On due consideration to the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. and considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of the applicant, the applicant is liable 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 applicant shall also be taken care of as per the aforesaid judgment of the Apex Court.

¶15

In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed. Let the accused-applicant- Khurshid Khan be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on anticipatory bail till the conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶16

(i). that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

¶17

(ii). that 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;

¶18

(iii). that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court;

¶19

(iv). that in case charge-sheet is submitted the applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial;

¶20

(v). that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;

¶21

(vi). that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;

¶22

(vii). that in case of breach of any of the above conditions the court concerned shall have the liberty to cancel the bail.

¶23

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

¶24

[Krishan Pahal, J.]

¶25

Order Date :- 17.5.2023 Vikas

¶26

Digitally signed by :- VIKAS VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Khurshid Khan v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Khurshid Khan 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

Imran Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Chetan Swaroop Alias Chetanya Swaroop Vs State of U.P. and Another

Suresh Kumar Bind Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Iqbal Ahmad Vs State of U.P. and Another

Tareekh Jafari@ Saiyad Tarif Jafri Vs State of U.P.

Shri Ram Chauhan and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another