This interim order granted anticipatory bail to Mohd. Azeem under Section 438 Cr.P.C., relying on parity principles established in a connected matter involving his brother, Waseem Akram.
Interim anticipatory bail granted upon furnishing personal bond and two solvent sureties with standard conditions.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 11
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 2603 of 2024
Applicant :- Mohd. Azeem Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Ram Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.
"Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
The instant anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 0228 of 2021, under sections 420,467,468,506,120-B of the IPC, Police Station-Ahirauli, DistrictAmbedkar Nagar.
Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated. He added that the first information report has been lodged against all the accused persons including the present applicant,whereas, the role to the present applicant is assigned for threatening and except apart, there is no role of the applicant. He submits that the present applicant is neither vendor nor vendee or the marginal witness and thus, he is in no way the beneficiary of the same and being the brother of the bonafide purchaser, he has been implicated in the present matter. He also added that the chargesheet has been filed in the case and thus, there is no possibility that the present applicant will abscond from the investigation proceedings. He also submits that there is an apprehension that the police will arrest the applicant and therefore, submission is that the applicant may be enlarged on anticipatory bail.
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.
Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and after perusal of the record, this Court finds it a fit case for grant of interim anticipatory bail.
Accordingly, till the next date of listing, the present applicant-
Waseem Akarm shall be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on an interim anticipatory bail on his furnishing personal bond and two solvent sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-
(i) that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;
(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;
(iii) that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court;
(iv) that in case chargesheet is submitted the applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial;
(v) that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;
(vi) that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;
(vii) that in case of breach of any of the above conditions the court concerned shall have the liberty to cancel the bail.
List/put up this matter in the week commencing 11.11.2024, as fresh.
In the meantime, learned counsel for the State shall file the counter affidavit."
(i) that the applicant shall make himself available for
interrogation by a police officer as and when required;
(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;
(iii) that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court;
(iv) that in case chargesheet is submitted the applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial;
(v) that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;
(vi) that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;
(vii) that in case of breach of any of the above conditions the court concerned shall have the liberty to cancel the bail. List/put up this matter in the week commencing 11.11.2024, as fresh.
In the meantime, learned counsel for the State shall file the counter affidavit.
[Rajesh Singh Chauhan, J.]
Order Date :- 22.11.2024 Om
Digitally signed by :- OM PRAKASH MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to anticipatory bail based on parity with the co-accused Waseem Akram?
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Waseem Akram vs. State of U.P.Applied¶2
Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application u/s 438 Cr.P.C. No. 2435 of 2024 (Waseem Akram vs. State of U.P.)
Mohd. Azeem
State Of U.P.
Rajesh Singh Chauhan
As recorded by the court registry
3 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
