Allowed

Saeed and Anothers v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC19 Nov 2024ABAIL/10573/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court granted anticipatory bail to the applicants in a case involving dowry and sexual offence allegations. Bail was conditioned upon furnishing a bond with sureties and complying with standard conditions, effective until the police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. is submitted.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted to Saeed and Shamsher on personal bond of Rs. 50,000 with two sureties each, subject to standard conditions until police report.

Saeed and Anothers vs State of U.P. — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:180808

¶2

Court No. - 69

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 10573 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Saeed And Anothers Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Udai Shanker Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Ashutosh Srivastava,J.

¶6

Heard Shri Udai Shanker Mishra, learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State- opposite party, and perused the material placed on record.

¶7

This application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 424 of 2023, under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506, 377, 376 I.P.C., Police Station Sarai Khwaja Jaunpur, District Jaunpur.

¶8

Counsel for the applicants submit that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the instant case. Learned counsel for the applicants further submits that informant had illicit relationship with another person, when her husband-applicant no. 1 came to know about the same and was ready to leave her, she has concocted a false story and lodged the present F.I.R. dated 26.12.2023 with allegation that her husband-applicant no. 1 and his family members were demanding additional dowry of Rs. One lac and a motorcycle from the informant and also tortured her mentally and physically for the same, applicant no. 1 & 2 had made forcefully physical relationship with her. The F.I.R. has been lodged after 11 years of her marriage therefore allegation regarding dowry or 498-A I.P.C. is not fulfilled. It is a false and fabricated F.I.R. just only to harass the applicants and his family members for extracting money from them. The applicants have no criminal antecedents. It is next submitted that investigation is going on and the applicant has apprehension of their arrest in the above mentioned case.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. and counsel for the informant have opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.

¶10

Counsel for the applicants further submits that the application for grant of anticipatory bail be confined only till the submission of police report.

¶11

Having regard to the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicants, considering the nature of accusations, antecedents of the applicants, without commenting on merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicants are entitled to be enlarged on anticipatory bail till the submission of police report.

¶12

In the event of arrest, the applicants - Saeed and Shamsher be released on anticipatory bail in the aforesaid case crime till the submission of police report, if any, under Section 173 (2) Cr.P.C., on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the police station concerned with the following conditions:-

¶13

(i) The applicants shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

¶14

(ii) The applicants 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 from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

¶15

(iii) The applicants shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court and if they have passport, the same shall be deposited by them, before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned.

¶16

In default of any of the conditions, the Investigating Officer is at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicants.

¶17

The Investigating Officer is directed to conclude the investigation of the present case in accordance with law expeditiously preferably within a period of three months from the date of production of a copy of this order independently without being prejudiced by any observation made by this Court while considering and deciding the present anticipatory bail application of the applicant.

¶18

The applicants are directed to produce a copy of this order before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned within ten days from today, who shall ensure the compliance of present order.

¶19

The application stands disposed of.

¶20

Order Date :- 19.11.2024 VS

¶21

Digitally signed by :- VIBHA SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Saeed and Anothers v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Saeed and Anothers v. State of U.P.

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

Bechan vs State of U.P.

Govind vs State of U.P. and Another

Suraj vs State of U.P.

Kalicharan vs State of U.P. and Another

Sanju vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Dr Nawab Ahmad vs Smt Kamrunisha and 6 Others