Partly allowed

Imam Ali v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC14 Nov 2024ABAIL/2404/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court granted interim anticipatory bail to the applicant, identifying him as a marginal witness with no prior criminal history. The Court found no likelihood of fleeing or tampering with evidence, factoring in that the chargesheet was already filed.

What did the court decide?

Interim anticipatory bail granted on personal bond and two solvent sureties with conditions to appear for interrogation and not tamper with evidence or flee India.

Imam Ali vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt… — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Court No. - 15

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 2404 of 2024

¶3

Applicant :- Imam Ali Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rajeev Yadav,Dinesh Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.

¶5

Rejoinder affidavit filed today is taken on record.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶7

The instant application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 45 of 2023, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC, Police Station Mankapur, District Gonda.

¶8

Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the instant case. He next submits that the applicant is a marginal witness of the Power of Attorney, though he is not the beneficiary of the same. He added that the applicant has only identified the person by whom the Power of Attorney has been executed. There is no fault on the part of the applicant. He next submits that the chargesheet has been filed in the matter, as such there is no possibility that the applicant would tamper the evidence or would not appear before the Investigating Officer. He next added that the applicant has no previous criminal history and there is an apprehension that the police will arrest him, therefore, he may be enlarged on anticipatory bail.

¶9

On the other hand, learned AGA appearing for the State has opposed the contentions aforesaid and submits that the applicant is not entitled for any relief.

¶10

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and after perusal of the record, it transpires that the applicant is a marginal witness of the Power of Attorney and he is not the beneficiary of the same; chargesheet has already been filed, as such there is no possibility that the applicant will flee away from the investigation proceeding; the applicant has no previous criminal history, therefore, this Court finds it a fit case for grant of interim anticipatory bail.

¶11

Accordingly, till the next date of listing, the present applicant-

¶12

Imam Ali, shall be released forthwith, in case of his arrest, in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on an interim anticipatory bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two solvent sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶13

(i) that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

¶14

(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 them from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence;

¶15

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

¶16

(iv) that in case chargesheet is submitted the applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial;

¶17

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

¶18

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

¶19

(vii) that in case of breach of any of the above conditions the court concerned shall have the liberty to cancel the bail.

¶20

Let notice be issued to opposite party no. 2, returnable at an early date.

¶21

Steps be taken within a week.

¶22

If the steps are taken, the office shall proceed accordingly.

¶23

List/put up this matter in second week of January, 2025.

¶24

In the meantime, learned counsel for the State as well as opposite party no. 2 shall file their counter affidavits.

¶25

Order Date :- 5.12.2024 kkv/

¶26

Digitally signed by :- KRISHAN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Imam Ali v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Imam Ali v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko. and Another

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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

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

Sameer Chandel vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy./ Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Finance Lko and 2 Others

Smt. Sonal Jaiswal vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy./ Prin. Secy., Deptt. Finance Lko. and 3 Others

Ashish Kumar and Another vs State of U.P. and Another

Bablu Singh @ Sabhajeet Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. (Home) Lko.

Vishal Rao Chandel vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Civil Secretariat Lko