Allowed

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

Allahabad HC11 Apr 2023ABAIL/3362/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This single judge criminal miscellaneous order grants limited anticipatory bail to Jeetu Khan in a case involving illegal mining and graft allegations. The court allowed bail contingent upon a personal bond, adherence to standard conditions, and non-interference by the investigating officer.

What did the court decide?

Granted anticipatory bail on personal bond of Rs. 50,000 with two sureties till the submission of the police report.

Jeetu Khan Vs State of U.P. and Another — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 85

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 3362 of 2023

¶3

Applicant :- Jeetu Khan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Hans Nath Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶5

Supplementary afÏdavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State.

¶7

The instant Anticipatory Bail Application has been filed with a prayer to grant an anticipatory bail to the applicant, namely, Jeetu Khan, in Case Crime No.508 of 2022, under Sections- 420,467,468 IPC and section 3 Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, Police Station- Malpura , DistrictAgra

¶8

There is allegation against the applicant that he put manipulated number plate on his tractor which was involved in illegal mining.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. He has no criminal history to his credit. The applicant has definite apprehension that he may be arrested by the police any time.

¶10

Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the applicant. He has submitted that in view of the seriousness of the allegations made against the applicant, he is not entitled to grant of anticipatory bail. The apprehension of the applicant is not founded on any material on record. Only on the basis of imaginary fear anticipatory bail cannot be granted.

¶11

After considering the rival submissions this court finds that there is a case registered/about to be registered against the applicant. It cannot be definitely said when the police may apprehend him. After the lodging of FIR the arrest can be made by the police at will. There is no definite period fixed for

¶12

the police to arrest an accused against whom an FIR has been lodged. The courts have repeatedly held that arrest should be the last option for the police and it should be restricted to those exceptional cases where arresting the accused is imperative or his custodial interrogation is required. Irrational and indiscriminate arrests are gross violation of human rights. In the case of Joginder Kumar v. State of Uttar Pradesh AIR 1994 SC 1349 the Apex Court has referred to the third report of National Police Commission wherein it is mentioned that arrests by the police in India is one of the chief source of corruption in the police. The report suggested that, by and large, nearly 60 percent of the arrests were either unnecessary or unjustified and that such unjustified police action accounted for 43.2 percent of expenditure of the jails. Personal liberty is a very precious fundamental rights and it should be curtailed only when it becomes imperative. According to the peculiar facts and circumstances of the peculiar case the arrest of an accused should be made.

¶13

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusation and his antecedents, the applicant is entitled to be released on anticipatory bail for limited period in this case considering the exceptions considered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi)- 2020 SCC Online SC 98.

¶14

In the event of arrest, the applicant shall be released on anticipatory bail till the submission of police report, if any, under section 173 (2) Cr.P.C. before the competent Court on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House OfÏcer of the police station concerned Court with the following conditions:-

¶15

(i) The applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by the police ofÏcer as and when required;

¶16

(ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person

¶17

acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police ofÏcer;

¶18

(iii) The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court and if he has passport, the same shall be deposited by him before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned.

¶19

In default of any of the conditions, the Investigating OfÏcer/Govt. Advocate/concerned court is at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant.

¶20

The Investigating OfÏcer is directed to conclude the investigation, if pending, of the present case in accordance with law, expeditiously, independently without being prejudiced by any observations made by this Court while considering and deciding the present anticipatory bail application of the applicant.

¶21

The applicant is directed to produce a certified copy of this order of this Court before the S.S.P./S.P. or C.P./A.C.P. concerned within ten days from today, if investigation is in progress who shall ensure the compliance of present order

¶22

Order Date :- 11.4.2023 Atul kr. sri.

¶23

Digitally signed by :- ATUL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jeetu 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

Pramod Kumar Mandal Alias Pramod Mandal Vs State of U.P.

Mohd Nashid @ Mohd Nashit Vs State of U.P. and Another

Basaruddin Vs State of U.P. and Another

Nijamudeen Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Papendra Vs State of U.P.

Mahendra Bhar Vs State of U.P.