Allowed

Fareed @ Fareed Ahmad v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC12 Jul 2023ABAIL/3155/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Judicature at Allahabad granted anticipatory bail to the applicant in connection with an FIR under sections 323, 504, 506, and 303 IPC. The court observed that the applicant cooperated during the investigation and released a charge sheet, noting the settled principles from Sushila Aggarwal that bail need not be limited in duration and can continue till conclusion of trial.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted on personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties; conditions included not tampering with evidence or intimidating witnesses, not leaving India, and obeying court orders.

Fareed @ Fareed Ahmad Vs State of U.P. and Another — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:139892

¶2

Court No. - 73

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 3155 of 2023 Applicant :- Fareed @ Fareed Ahmad Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Umair Mahmood 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- Fareed @ Fareed Ahmad in connection with Case Crime No. 668 of 2021, under sections 323, 504, 506, 308 IPC, P.S. Seohara, District Bijnor.

¶7

It has been submitted 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. 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

It is further submitted that the general role has been assigned to the present accused applicant. It is also submitted that during the course of investigation, the accused applicant has been cooperative to the I.O. of the case and now after filing of the charge sheet, no custodial interrogation is required now, and as such he is entitled for anticipatory bail.

¶9

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

¶10

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.

¶11

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.

¶12

It has been further held by the Hon'ble Apex Court that while considering an

¶13

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.

¶14

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.

¶15

The anticipatory bail application is allowed .

¶16

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 :-

¶17

(i) 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

(ii) The applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶19

(iii) 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.

¶20

(iv) 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.

¶21

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.

¶22

Order Date :- 12.7.2023/Shivangi

¶23

Digitally signed by :- SHIVANGI YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Fareed @ Fareed Ahmad v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Fareed @ Fareed Ahmad 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

Sughar Lal Pal Vs State of U.P.

Paramhans Agarwal Vs State of U.P. and Another

Jagdish Prasad and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Hari Shankar Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Vandana Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Jafar Hussain Vs State of U.P.