Allowed

Barkat Ali @ Dilshad v. State of Up and Another

Allahabad HC16 Jul 2024ABAIL/5464/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Applicant sought anticipatory bail under Sections 364 and 120-B IPC added during investigation; he had earlier been granted anticipatory bail with no criminal history. Court allowed the application citing Sushila Aggarwal and imposed standard conditions till trial conclusion.

What did the court decide?

Applicant to be released on anticipatory bail till conclusion of trial on personal bond with two sureties, subject to stated conditions.

Barkat Ali @ Dilshad vs State of Up and Another — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:113768

¶2

Court No. - 68

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 5464 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Barkat Ali @ Dilshad Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Mohd Hamid Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Mohd. Hamid, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Ashutosh Srivastava, learned A.G.A. for the State and also perused the record.

¶7

The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in F.I.R./Case Crime No. 39 of 2023, under Sections 364 & 120-B of IPC, Police Station - Barwapatti, District - Kushinagar, with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.

¶8

Admittedly, the applicant was enlarged on anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 2.8.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application u/s 438 Cr.P.C. No.8622 of 2023. Subsequently, Sections 364 & 120-B of IPC have been added during investigation.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant is maliciously being prosecuted in the present case due to ulterior motive and has apprehension of his arrest. He has nothing to do with the said offence as alleged by the prosecution. The investigation is still going on. It is further stated that the applicant has not misused the liberty granted to him earlier on.

¶10

Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicant to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against him. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicant have also been touched upon at length. It is further submitted that the applicant has no criminal history. In case, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed, he will not misuse the liberty and shall cooperate with trial.

¶11

On the other hand, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant and also the fact that the applicant has no criminal history.

¶12

Considering the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, nature of accusations and antecedents of the applicant, the applicant is liable to be enlarged on anticipatory bail in view of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of " Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi) (2020) 5 SCC 1 ". The future contingencies regarding the anticipatory bail being granted to applicant shall also be taken care of as per the aforesaid judgment of Supreme Court.

¶13

Without expressing any opinion upon ultimate merits of the case either ways which may adversely affect the trial of the case, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed .

¶14

In the event of arrest of the applicant, Barkat Ali @ Dilshad, involved in the aforesaid case crime number, shall be released on anticipatory bail till the conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Presiding Officer/Court Concerned, with the conditions that:-

¶15

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

¶16

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;

¶17

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

¶18

iv. that 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;

¶19

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court concerned shall have the liberty to cancel the bail granted to the applicant.

¶20

It is made clear that observations made in granting anticipatory bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.

¶21

Order Date:- 16.7.2024/Siddhant

¶22

(Justice Krishan Pahal)

¶23

Digitally signed by :- SIDDHANT SAHU High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Barkat Ali @ Dilshad v. State of Up and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Barkat Ali @ Dilshad v. State of Up and Another

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

Similar cases

Chanda @ Reshma vs State of U.P.

Javed Ahamad vs State of Up

Faizan vs State of U.P. and Another

Ved Prakash @ Vedpal vs State of U.P. and Another

Sisai vs State of Up

Shivam Mishra vs State of U.P. and Another