Allowed

Mohammad Suhail Khan v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC15 Oct 2024/315/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Judicature at Allahabad granted interim anticipatory bail to Mohammad Suhail Khan under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in a case under Section 392 IPC, relying on Sushila Aggarwal, subject to conditions including cooperation with trial and non-interference with witnesses.

What did the court decide?

Grant of interim anticipatory bail till disposal of trial subject to specific conditions including cooperation and non-interference.

Mohammad Suhail Khan Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy… — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:69475

¶2

Court No. - 15

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 315 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Mohammad Suhail Khan Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another

¶5

Counsel for Applicant :- Amit Kumar Singh,Amjad Siddiqui Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶6

Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record.

¶8

Instant application has been filed with the prayer to enlarge the accused/applicant on anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.0739 of 2019 under Section 392 I.P.C. P.S. Gazipur, District Lucknow.

¶9

From perusal of the order sheet, it appears that on 9.2.2023 following order was passed wherein the present applicant has been granted interim anticipatory bail:-

¶10

"The applicant has moved the present application under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. praying for grant of anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.0739 of 2019 under section 392 I.P.C., P.S. Gazipur, district Lucknow.

¶11

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶12

It is submitted on behalf of the applicant that the applicant is not named in the first information report, Precisely on 27.2.2020, three persons were arrested including one Harsh Singh from whom one OPPO mobile was recovered. Name of the accused applicant has come in the confessional statement of the co-accused in police custody which has no relevance. The applicant has been falsely implicated. He has no criminal antecedent.

¶13

It is next submitted that the applicant has cooperated in the investigation. Charge sheet has been filed. He undertakes on behalf of the applicant that the applicant shall cooperate in the trial.

¶14

Issue notice to respondent No.2.

¶15

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer made by the applicant's counsel. He is allowed fifteen days' time to file objections.

¶16

List on 17.3.2023.

¶17

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering

¶18

the nature of accusation and the applicant having no criminal antecedents, the undertaking given on behalf of the applicant that he shall cooperate in the trial and gravity of offence, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case in the light of judgment of Supreme Court in Sushila Aggarwal and others vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and another (2020)5 SCC 1, subject to his cooperation in the trial.

¶19

In view of the above as also keeping in view of the judgment in Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi) 2020 SCC OnLine 98, the accused applicant is directed to surrender before trial court if he is summoned to face trial for offence in question after filing of the charge sheet. The accused applicant shall be released on 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.

¶20

(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;

¶21

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

¶22

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

¶23

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

¶24

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

¶25

Any other reasonable restrictions/conditions which the trial court may deem fit and proper can be imposed.

¶26

It is made clear that the observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses."

¶27

From the order dated 9.2.2023, it transpires that co-ordinate Bench of this Court has considered that the name of the present applicant came into light in the confessional statement and there is no criminal antecedent to his credit. Counter affidavit has been filed and the aforesaid facts have not been denied and there is no any other evidence brought before this Court in the counter affidavit which could substantiate that the applicant is not entitled for anticipatory bail.

¶28

In view of the aforesaid, the present anticipatory bail application is hereby disposed of while extending anticipatory bail to the applicant, namely, Mohammad Suhail Khan till disposal of the trial subject to the following conditions:-

¶29

(i) that the applicant shall make himself available for

¶30

interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

¶31

(ii) that 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;

¶32

(iii) that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court;

¶33

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

¶34

(v) that the applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶35

In case of default, it would be open for the investigating agency to move application for vacation of this interim protection.

¶36

Order Date :- 15.10.2024 Ram Murti

¶37

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

Mohammad Suhail Khan v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohammad Suhail Khan v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home 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

Similar cases

Om Prakash vs State of U.P. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Raju @ Raju Pasi vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Shakti Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Madan Murari and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko. and Another

Amar Bahadur Gharti Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko

Smt. Shyama Devi Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.