Dismissed¶8

Jameel @ Jameera v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC23 May 2023ABAIL/4444/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anticipatory bail (S. 438 Cr.P.C.) refused by Allahabad High Court on 23.5.2023 to applicant Jameel @ Jameera (stated in counsel's submission to be 74 years old) in Case Crime No. 35 of 2023, P.S. Chilkana, Saharanpur (ss. 307, 323, 324, 352, 452, 504, 506 IPC); court guided by Sushila Aggarwal (2020) 5 SCC 1, cited gravity of accusations and active participation; application rejected.

What did the court decide?

The court decided the matter on the basis of the attending facts and circumstances, the serious nature of the allegations, and expressly without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case. ¶7

Jameel @ Jameera Vs State of U.P. — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:112977

¶2

Court No. - 84

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 4444 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Jameel @ Jameera Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sunil Dubey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Sunil Kumar Shukla

¶5

Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.

¶6

This application has been moved on behalf of the applicant Jameel @ Jameera seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 35 of 2023, under Sections 323, 324, 452, 352, 504, 506, 307 IPC, Police Station Chilkana, District Saharanpur.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the informant as well as the learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶8

It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and he has apprehension of his arrest in the above-mentioned case, whereas there is no credible evidence against him. Allegations levelled against the applicant are false. Applicant is an old aged person of 74 years and no specific role has been assigned to him in the alleged offence. No injury of sphere has been found on the body of any injured person. The investigation of the case is going on and the applicant is cooperating with the Investigating Officer. It has been submitted that in case applicant is granted anticipatory bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and would obey all conditions of bail.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the informant vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail and submitted that three persons have sustained grievous injuries in the incident and fracture has also been caused. Injured Abdul Raziq is still under treatment in the hospital and his condition is serious. It is further submitted that due to enmity present offence has been committed and the present applicant has actively participated in commission of the crime.

¶10

In this matter, it has been alleged in the F.I.R. that on 21.2.2023 at about 8.00 a.m. while the three sons of the informant were going

¶11

to their gher, they were surrounded by the four named accused persons including the present applicant who were carrying sphere, sword and sariya in their hands and all the three sons of the informant were bitterly assaulted by all the named accused persons with intention to kill them on account of some animosity due to plantation being made by the applicants which was protested by the informant side. F.I.R. was lodged and investigation is going on.

¶12

In Sushila Aggarwal and others vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and another, (2020) 5 SCC 1 , the Hon'ble Apex Court has held that while considering an 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, likelihood 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 and active participation of the applicant, all attending facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that allegations are serious in nature, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, in my view, it is not a fit case for anticipatory bail to the applicant. Prayer made in the application is refused.

¶14

The application is rejected .

¶15

Order Date :- 23.5.2023

¶16

safi

¶17

Digitally signed by :- MAHBOOB SAFI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Jameel @ Jameera v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jameel @ Jameera v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Brijesh Sonkar and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt. Bhavana Vs State of U.P. and Another

Anand Kumar Gupta and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shadakat Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ashish Kumar Jain and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Dinesh Verma Vs State of U.P. and Another