Allowed

Mohd. Shahid v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Civil Sectt. Lko.

Allahabad HC4 Jan 2024/2992/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court granted anticipatory bail to an applicant in a cheating and forgery case, making an interim protection order absolute, requiring his surrender within 20 days on furnishing a personal bond with sureties and adhering to conditions regarding trial attendance and cooperation.

What did the court decide?

Aniticipatory bail allowed on personal bond with two sureties upon surrender within 20 days subject to six conditions including attendance and cooperation.

Mohd. Shahid Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home… — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:1077

¶2

Court No. - 15

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 2992 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Mohd. Shahid Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Civil Sectt. Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Anoop Kumar Upadhyay Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Mohd. Faiz Alam Khan,J.

¶6

Counter affidavit filed by the State is taken on record.

¶7

Heard Shri Anoop Kumar Upadhyay, learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶8

The present anticipatory bail application has been moved by the accused/applicants- Madhuri Verma in Case Crime No. 78/2022, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC, Police Station Kotwali Utraula, District Balrampur, with the prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail as he is apprehending arrest in the above-mentioned case.

¶9

Learned counsel for the accused-applicant while pressing the bail application submits that it is a case of false implication and even if the case of the prosecution is taken on its face the allegations with regard to the applicant are to the tune that he has been a witness of a sale deed which is shown to have been executed by an imposter, however, he is not the beneficiary of the transaction and was not having any interest or connivance with the other accused persons.

¶10

It is further submitted that during the course of investigation the applicant has approached before the Division Bench of this Court by filing Crl. Misc. Writ Petition No. 2662 of 2022 for quashing of the First Information Report, vide order dated 11.5.2022 passed therein that his arrest was stayed till filing of police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C.

¶11

It is further submitted that now the charge sheet has been filed and applicant has cooperated throughout in the investigation and there is no allegation of any kind with regard to non-cooperation in the investigation and since the charge sheet has been filed, the applicant would cooperate also in

¶12

expeditious disposal of the case before the court below and undertakes that he will not seek adjournment when the prosecution witnesses would be in attendance.

¶13

It is also submitted that vide order dated 21.12.2023 in trained protection from the arrest was granted by this court and the applicant has followed the conditions under which his liberty was protected. He is also not having any criminal antecedent.

¶14

Learned AGA on the other hand submits that the applicant is accused of committing an heinous offence and therefore, he is not entitled for any discretion.

¶15

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record, it is reflected that that during the course of investigation the liberty of the applicant was protected by a Division Bench of this Court by passing order dated 11.5.2023 passed in Crl. Misc. Writ Petition No. 2266/2022 and thereafter after submission of charge sheet in this case interim order protecting the liberty was passed by this Court on 21.12.2023 and nothing has been brought in the knowledge of this Court which may suggest that the applicant had not followed the directions within subject to which his liberty was protected. The charge sheet has been filed by the Investigating Agency without arresting the applicant, which prima facie shows that having regard to the order passed by the Division Bench of this Court the applicant has cooperated in the investigation. he is not having any criminal antecedent and nothing appears to have been changed in passing of the interim order dated 21.12.2023. Thus the interim order dated 21.12.2023 is made absolute and the instant anticipatory bail application moved by the applicantMohd. Shahid is allowed in terms that in the event of the arrest of the applicant under any process of the trial court or on his appearance/ surrender of the applicant before the trial court within 20 days form today i.e. till 24.01.2024 he shall be released forthwith on anticipatory bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court concerned, subject to the following conditions:

¶16

The applicant shall remain present before the trial court as and when his presence would be required.

¶17

The applicant in presence of the prosecution witnesses before the trial court shall not seek any adjournment and would do all required for early disposal of the case and in violation of two conditions alone shall be sufficient for the trial court to cancel the facility of bail.

¶18

The applicant if not arrested earlier, shall surrender before the trial court within 20 days from today i.e. on or before 24.01.2024 and will cooperate in the trial.

¶19

The applicant shall Cooperate in the investigation and will make herself available as and when required by the Investigating officer of the case, even for the recovery of any fact, if the case is directed to be further investigated.

¶20

The applicant shall not make any attempt to influence the prosecution witnesses and will also not commit any crime during her release on anticipatory bail.

¶21

The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that she shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence and especially when the prosecution witnesses are present in court.

¶22

The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C.

¶23

If in the opinion of the trial court default of any of the condition placed above is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of their bail and shall proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶24

It is clarified that all the observations contained in this order are only for disposal of this anticipatory bail application and shall not affect the proceedings before the trial court in any manner.

¶25

Order Date :- 4.1.2024

¶26

Muk

¶27

Digitally signed by :- MOHD UMAR KHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Mohd. Shahid v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Civil Sectt. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd. Shahid v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Civil Sectt. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sangam Verma @ Sangam Kumar Verma Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko

Om Prakash Verma Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Satyam Pandey Alias Ashutosh Pandey Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko and Another

Shahbaj Ahmad @ Sabloo Vs Sate of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Civil Sectt. Lko and Another

Ram Prakash vs C.B.I. Anti Corruption Branch Lko.

Rahul Saroj Vs State of U.P. Thru. A.C.S. /Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Govt. Lko. and Another