Allowed

Kari Arshad v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC5 Jul 2024ABAIL/5436/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court entertains an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. The applicant, facing severe charges including sedition and criminal intimidation, seeks bail with a bond of Rs. 50,000. The court finds that a prima facie case for anticipatory bail exists.

What did the court decide?

The anticipatory bail application is allowed. The applicant shall be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000 with two sureties in the same amount, subject to conditions of coope

Kari Arshad vs State of U.P. — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:115503

¶2

Court No. - 48

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 5436 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Kari Arshad Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Amit Rai Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶6

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

¶7

The present application has been moved by the applicant seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 1130 of 2019, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 452, 336, 427, 188, 109,120-B, 153-A & 295-A, IPC; Section 7 of Criminal Law Amendment Act and Section 3 of Prevention of Damages to Public Property Act, Police Station Kotwali City, District Bijnor with the prayer that in the event of arrest, applicant may be released on bail.

¶8

Counsel for the applicant submits that total seven cases were registered against the applicant regarding the same incident at the same police station. In four of such offences, the applicant has already been enlarged on anticipatory bail vide order dated 20.06.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 Cr.P.C. Nos.5223 of 2024, 5224 of 2024, 5386 of 2024 and 5446 of 2024 by means of detailed orders and reasoning. In view of the above he may be granted anticipatory bail in the present case also. Prior to implication in these cases, the applicant had no criminal history. He undertakes to co-operate with the trial and not to indulge in any such case in future.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the application for anticipatory bail and argued that during investigation, involvement of applicant was found and that he has been identified through CCTV footage.

¶10

The parameters for granting anticipatory bail have been discussed in Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra, (2011) 1 SCC 694 , wherein Hon'ble Supreme Court has observed as under:

¶11

"112. The following factors and parameters can be taken into consideration while dealing with the anticipatory bail:

¶12

"(i) The nature and gravity of the accusation and the exact role of the

¶13

accused must be properly comprehended before arrest is made;

¶14

(ii) The antecedents of the applicant including the fact as to whether the accused has previously undergone imprisonment on conviction by a court in respect of any cognizable offence;

¶15

(iii) The possibility of the applicant to flee from justice; (iv) The possibility of the accused's likelihood to repeat similar or other offences;

¶16

(v) Where the accusations have been made only with the object of injuring or humiliating the applicant by arresting him or her;

¶17

(vi) Impact of grant of anticipatory bail particularly in cases of large magnitude affecting a very large number of people;

¶18

(vii) The courts must evaluate the entire available material against the accused very carefully. The court must also clearly comprehend the exact role of the accused in the case. The cases in which the accused is implicated with the help of Sections 34 and 149 of the Penal Code, 1860 the court should consider with even greater care and caution because overimplication in the cases is a matter of common knowledge and concern;

¶19

(viii) While considering the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail, a balance has to be struck between two factors, namely, no prejudice should be caused to the free, fair and full investigation and there should be prevention of harassment, humiliation and unjustified detention of the accused;

¶20

(ix) The court to consider reasonable apprehension of tampering of the witness or apprehension of threat to the complainant;

¶21

(x) Frivolity in prosecution should always be considered and it is only the element of genuineness that shall have to be considered in the matter of grant of bail and in the event of there being some doubt as to the genuineness of the prosecution, in the normal course of events, the accused is entitled to an order of bail."

¶22

A perusal of the parameters for granting anticipatory bail as stated-above, would show that the Court must consider the seriousness of the offence, the nature of investigation that is required before the charge sheet is filed, the likelihood of the petitioner's absconding from justice, the antecedents of the accused and chances of the petitioner tampering with evidence or threatening the witnesses.

¶23

In the instant case, considering the submissions of the learned counsel for the

¶24

parties, nature of accusations and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on merit of the case, a case for anticipatory bail is made out.

¶25

The anticipatory bail application is allowed.

¶26

In the event of arrest of the applicant- Kari Arshad , involved in the aforesaid case crime shall be released on anticipatory bail on his 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/Court concerned with the following conditions :-

¶27

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

¶28

(ii) 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/her/them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

¶29

(iii) the applicant would co-operate during investigation and trial and would not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶30

In default of any of the conditions, the Investigating Officer/prosecution shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant.

¶31

Order Date :- 19.7.2024 I.A.Siddiqui

¶32

Digitally signed by :- IMRAN AHMAD SIDDIQUI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Kari Arshad v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kari Arshad 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Bhajju vs State of U.P. and Another

Juvenile X vs State of Up and 3 Others

X Juvenile vs State of U.P. and Another

Atul vs State of U.P.

Santosh Kumar Pal vs State of U.P.

Bhikam Singh vs State of U.P.