Allowed

Zakir Husain v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC28 Nov 2024ABAIL/11365/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted anticipatory bail to the applicant under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in a trial pending case regarding various offenses, citing parity with a co-accused and pandemic considerations, imposing standard conditions including non-surrender abroad and personal appearance.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties subject to conditions of not leaving the country, surrendering passport, and appearing for trial stages.

Zakir Husain vs State of U.P. — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:187243

¶2

Court No. - 48

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 11365 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Zakir Husain Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Braj Mohan Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶6

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

¶7

The instant anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Zakir Husain, with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 0159 of 2021 under section 147, 149, 323, 504, 506, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B, 34, 354Kha, 452 I.P.C., police station Naini, District Prayagraj, during pendency of trial.

¶8

Prior notice of this bail application was served in the office of Government Advocate and as per Chapter XVIII, Rule 18 of the Allahabad High Court Rules and as per direction dated 20.11.2020 of this Court in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 Cr.P.C. No. 8072 of 2020, Govind Mishra @ Chhotu Versus State of U.P. , hence, this anticipatory bail application is being heard. Grant of further time to the learned A.G.A as per Section 438 (3) Cr.P.C. (U.P. Amendment) is not required.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant has contended that coaccused, Jyoti Khera, has been granted anticipatory bail by this Court on 28.5.2021 in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 Cr.P.C. No. 9906 of 2021. The case of the applicant stands on identical footing, hence the applicant is also entitled for bail on the ground of parity. The applicant has definite apprehension that he may be arrested by the police any time.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail but does not dispute the claim of parity.

¶11

Hence without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of applicant and also the second surge in the cases of novel

¶12

coronavirus and possibility of further surge of the pandemic, he is directed to be enlarged on anticipatory bail as per the Constitution Bench judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi)- 2020 SCC Online SC 98. The future contingencies regarding anticipatory bail being granted to applicant shall also be taken care of as per the aforesaid judgment of the Apex Court.

¶13

In the event of arrest, the applicant shall be released on anticipatory bail. Let the applicant involved in the aforesaid crime be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶14

The applicant shall not leave the country during the currency of trial without prior permission from the concerned trial Court.

¶15

The applicant shall surrender his passport, if any, to the concerned Court forthwith. His passport will remain in custody of the concerned Court.

¶16

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 her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

¶17

The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence and the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law to ensure presence of the applicant.

¶18

In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail, the Court concerned may take appropriate action in accordance with law and judgment of Apex Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi)- 2020 SCC Online SC 98.

¶19

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

¶20

The party shall file computer generated copy of such order

¶21

downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.

¶22

The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.

¶23

Order Date :- 28.11.2024 Rohit

¶24

Digitally signed by :- ROHIT DAS High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Zakir Husain v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Zakir Husain 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

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jyoti vs State of Up and Another

Pramod Rao and Another vs State of U.P. and Another

Anuj Kumar vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Babu Lal and 4 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Bhagwanti and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Saurabh Pundir @ Kalu vs State of U.P.