Allowed

Syed Zamin Abbas Rizvi @ Yameen v. State of Up. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC2 Dec 2024/1021/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal appeal under Section 14A(2) SC/ST Act challenging rejection of anticipatory bail in a rioting and caste-atrocity case. Charge sheet filed; appellant not arrested during investigation. Court set aside the Special Judge's order and directed release on anticipatory bail with conditions.

What did the court decide?

Order dated 16.01.2024 rejecting anticipatory bail set aside; appellant directed to surrender within twenty days and to be released on anticipatory bail by trial court with conditions.

Syed Zamin Abbas Rizvi @ Yameen Vs State of Up. Thru… — Caste Atrocities | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:79793

¶2

Court No. - 16

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1021 of 2024 Appellant :- Syed Zamin Abbas Rizvi @ Yameen Respondent :- State Of Up. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Mohd. Amir Khan,Sheelam Devi,Surya Prakash Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶5

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

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State and perused the record.

¶7

This criminal appeal has been filed by the appellant under Section 14A (2) the Schedule Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 to set aside the order dated 16.01.2024 passed in Anticipatory Bail application No. 98/2024 "Tabseer Hasan and another Vs. State of U.P", filed in case crime No. 433/2022, under Sections 147/148/149/323/504/506/332/353/342/364 I.P.C. and Section 3(1)(da), 3(1)(dha) and 3(2)(v) of S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station Thakurganj, District Lucknow.

¶8

The coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 22.03.2024 has passed the following order:-

¶9

"(Order on Appeal)

¶10

1. Heard.

¶11

2. Admit.

¶12

3. Summon the trial court record.

¶13

4. Issue notice to the private respondent returnable at an early date.

¶14

5. List this case on 13.05.2024.

¶15

(Order on C.M.A.01/2024)

¶16

1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶17

2. A prayer for bail has been made by the appellant in this criminal appeal, which has been filed against the judgement and order dated 16.01.2024 passed by Special Judge SC/ST Act, Lucknow in Anticipatory

¶18

Bail Application No.98/2024 arising out of Case Crime No.433/2022, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 504, 506, 332, 353, 342, 364 I.P.C. and Sections 3(1)(Da), 2(1)(Dha), 3(2)(V) of SC/ST Act, Police StationThakurganj, District- Lucknow.

¶19

3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that appellant was falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that during the course of investigation, appellant was not taken into custody. He further submits that charge sheet has already been submitted and custodial trial is not necessary. He further submits that similarly situated co-accused, namely, Tabasheer Hasan @ Sagar has been granted interim bail by this Court vide order dated 12.03.2024 passed in Criminal Appeal No.815 of 2024. He further relied on the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the cases of Siddharth Vs. State of U.P. reported in (2022) 1 SCC 676 and Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi) reported in (2020) 5 SCC 1 and submits that the appellant may be granted interim anticipatory bail.

¶20

4. Learned A.G.A. opposes the prayer for bail but he does not dispute this fact that appellant was not taken into custody during the course of investigation and there is no evidence that he misused the liberty granted to him. He also concedes this fact that similarly situated co-accused, namely, Tabasheer Hasan @ Sagar has been granted interim bail by this Court.

¶21

5. Having heard the submission made by learned counsel for the appellant as well as learned A.G.A and perused the material brought on record, this Court is of the view that appellant is entitled to be released on interim anticipatory bail during the pendency of criminal appeal before this Court.

¶22

6. Hence, prima facie, case for interim anticipatory bail is made out, at this stage.

¶23

7. Accordingly, the application for bail is allowed.

¶24

8. Let the appellant- Syed Zamin Abbas Rizvi @ Yameen involved in aforesaid case be released on interim anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- with two sureties of the like amount subject to following conditions:-

¶25

(i) The appellant shall cooperate in the disposal of appeal without seeking unnecessary adjournment.

¶26

(ii) The appellant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on interim anticipatory bail.

¶27

9. As soon as personal bonds and sureties are furnished, photocopies of the same are directed to be transmitted to this Court forthwith by the trial court concerned to be kept on record of this appeal.

¶28

10. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of interim anticipatory bail."

¶29

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that charge sheet in the matter has been filed. The applicant undertakes to cooperate in the trial. It has been further submitted that during

¶30

investigation, the applicant was not arrested. The applicant has no previous criminal antecedents.

¶31

It is further submitted that there is no likelihood that the appellant-applicant shall not cooperate in the trial or will misuse the liberty of bail granted by this Court.

¶32

Learned A.G.A. opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail, but could not dispute that during investigation, the appellant was not arrested.

¶33

On due consideration to the fact that charge sheet has been filed so also the fact that it is not the case of the prosecution that the applicant has not cooperated in the investigation, I am of the view that the appellant is entitled for anticipatory bail and the order passed by the court below is liable to be set aside.

¶34

Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the order dated 16.01.2024 passed in Anticipatory Bail application No. 98/2024 "Tabseer Hasan and another Vs. State of U.P", filed in case crime No. 433/2022, under Sections 147/148/149/323/504/506/332/353/342/364 I.P.C. and Section 3(1)(da), 3(1)(dha) and 3(2)(v) of S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station Thakurganj, District Lucknow, is set aside.

¶35

In view of the above, the accused applicant is directed to surrender before trial court within twenty days from today. The accused applicant shall be released on anticipatory bail by the trial court on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court, with the following conditions.

¶36

(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 tamper with the evidence;

¶37

(ii) The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court;

¶38

(iii)The applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;

¶39

(iv)The applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;

¶40

(v) In case of breach of any of the above conditions the court below shall have the liberty to cancel the bail;

¶41

It is made clear that the observations made in granting bail to

¶42

the applicant shall not in any way affect the trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.

¶43

Order Date :- 2.12.2024 R.C.

¶44

Digitally signed by :- RAM CHANDER YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Syed Zamin Abbas Rizvi @ Yameen v. State of Up. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Syed Zamin Abbas Rizvi @ Yameen v. State of Up. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. 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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Shailesh vs State of. U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Noor Alam Khan vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko and Another

Adesh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Manoj Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. and Another

Anil Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Rajjan and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.