Allowed

Jaan Mohammad v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC7 Apr 2023ABAIL/2720/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed an application for anticipatory bail under Sections 468 and 414 IPC. Relying on Sushila Aggarwal (2020), the Court held that bail could continue till the conclusion of the trial. The applicant was granted bail conditional upon furnishing a bond and sureties, with strict conditions against tampering, intimidation, or fleeing the country.

What did the court decide?

The anticipatory bail application was allowed till the conclusion of the trial, conditioned on furnishing a bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties.

Jaan Mohammad Vs State of U.P. — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 84

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 2720 of 2023

¶3

Applicant :- Jaan Mohammad Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mohd Shamim Khan,Deepak Singh Patel 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- Jaan Mohammad in connection with Case Crime No.72 of 2016, under Sections 468, 414 I.P.C., Police StationDeoband, District- Saharanpur.

¶7

It appears from the perusal of the record that initially an F.I.R. was lodged against the co-accused namely, Nasir under Sections 379, 328 I.P.C. Subsequently, on the basis of the recovery of stolen tractor-trolley, under Section 134 I.P.C. was added to the matter. The present accused-applicant obtained regular bail on 27.04.2016 from the competent Court as his name came into light during the course of investigation. Subsequently, sections 468 and 414 I.P.C. were also added in the charge-sheet filed against the applicant in the matter. Anticipatory bail under sections 468, 414 I.P.C. was moved before the Sessions Judge, Saharanpur which was rejected by the order dated 08.02.2023. Earlier, under Section 379, the accused-applicant was granted bail and subsequently Sections 468, 414 I.P.C. were also added in the matter. No misuse of bail has been made by the present applicant.

¶8

Now, the charge sheet has been submitted in the matter and copies of the order sheets filed on behalf of the accused appellants prima facie show that they are cooperating with the trial and appearing regularly before the Court either personally or through counsel.

¶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

¶12

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.

¶13

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.

¶14

The anticipatory bail application is allowed .

¶15

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 Station House Officer of the police station concerned with the following conditions :-

¶16

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.

¶17

The applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶18

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.

¶19

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.

¶20

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the Investigating Officer shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail of the applicant in accordance with law.

¶21

Order Date :- 7.4.2023 Sachin/

¶22

Digitally signed by :- SACHIN TIWARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Jaan Mohammad v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jaan Mohammad 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

Mohammad Kasif Vs State of U.P.

Priyanka Yadav Vs State of U.P. and Another

Anil Kumar Chaudhary Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sattar Vs State of U.P. thr. its Sec. Home U.P.

Faizan Alam and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Vaishnavi Jaiswal Vs State of U.P. and Another