Allowed

Shahjad v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC1 Aug 2024ABAIL/6431/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court granted anticipatory bail to the applicant Shahjad in a case involving alleged misconduct under Sections 354-A IPC and POCSO Act. The Court noted the dispute arose from an ancestral property disagreement and found no prima facie case or risk of tampering with evidence, allowing the bail subject to conditions.

What did the court decide?

Granted anticipatory bail subject to a personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- with two sureties and specific undertakings.

Shahjad vs State of U.P. and Another — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:123568

¶2

Court No. - 73

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 6431 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Shahjad Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Dr. Kamlesh Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Vikram D. Chauhan,J.

¶6

Learned A.G.A. for the State submits that notice with regard to present bail application has been served on the informant and further submits that instructions have been received and has no objection in case the bail application is heard on merits.

¶7

The present Anticipatory Bail Application has been filed with the prayer to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant - Shahjad in Case Crime No. 174 of 2024 under Sections 354-A I.P.C. and 7/8 POCSO Act, Police Station - Didoli, District - Amroha.

¶8

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that as per allegations in the First Information Report it is alleged that the applicant had misbehaved with the victim. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that statement of the victim has been recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. where it has been alleged that the applicant had previously touched the victim on the chest. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that as per the statement of the victim there is no allegation of assault or abuse. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that on account of ancestral property dispute between the parties the applicant has been falsely implicated in the case. It is further submitted by learned counsel for applicant that applicant is innocent and has no concern with the present matter. Allegations levelled against the applicant are false. No prima facie case is made out against the applicant. If the applicant is enlarged on anticipatory bail, he will not misuse the liberty and cooperate with the investigation. The applicant has apprehension of his arrest by the police any time.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer but does not dispute the factual matrix.

¶10

It is not shown by learned AGA that the offence in question will have impact on society at large. It is not shown that act causes harm to the society. The accusations arise out of dispute between individuals. It is not shown by learned AGA that the nature and gravity of allegations are such that the same would disentitle the applicant for relief of anticipatory bail. Learned AGA has not raised concern that any prejudice would be caused to free, fair and full investigation in the event the applicant is granted anticipatory bail. No material, facts, circumstances or concern been shown by learned AGA for the State that the accused may tamper with the evidence or witnesses or accused is of such character that his mere presence at large would intimidate the witnesses or that accused will use his liberty to subvert justice or tamper with the evidence.

¶11

Learned Counsel for opposite parties has not placed any criminal antecedents of the applicant. The applicant has no criminal history.

¶12

It is settled principle of law that the object of bail is to secure the attendance of the accused. No material particulars or circumstances suggestive of the applicant fleeing from justice or thwarting the course of justice or creating other troubles in the shape of repeating offences or intimidating witnesses and the like have been shown by learned AGA for the State.

¶13

In view of the above, the applicant is granted anticipatory bail in respect of offence described in para 2 of the present order. In the event of arrest of the applicant, he shall be released on anticipatory bail till submission of charge sheet on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs.25,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶14

(i) The applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police office as and when required.

¶15

(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 from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police office.

¶16

(iii) The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court concerned.

¶17

(iv) In the event, the applicant changes residential address, the applicant shall inform the court concerned/Investigating Officer

¶18

about new residential address in writing.

¶19

(v) The applicant shall cooperate with the investigation and make himself available for interrogation whenever required.

¶20

(vi) The applicant shall not obstruct or hamper the police investigation and not to play mischief with the evidence collected or yet to be collected by the police.

¶21

(vii) The applicant shall maintain law and order.

¶22

(viii) The applicant shall at the time of execution of the bond, furnish his address and mobile number to investigating officer, and the court concerned.

¶23

(ix) The applicant shall regularly remain present during the trial, and cooperate with the Court to complete the trial for the above offences.

¶24

(x) Non presence of the applicant or his counsel before the court concerned shall be construed as violation of the present order and the court concerned would be at liberty to take coercive measures in accordance with law.

¶25

In case of default of any of the conditions, the Investigating Officer shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of protection granted to the applicant.

¶26

With the directions made above, the anticipatory bail application stands allowed.

¶27

Order Date :- 1.8.2024 VMA

¶28

Digitally signed by :- VISHWA MOHAN ARORA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Shahjad v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shahjad v. State of U.P. 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

Similar cases

Sandeep Pathak vs State of U.P.

Deepak Kumar vs State of Up and Another

Raju @ Javed and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Saraswati Devi vs State of Up and Another

Bhagwat and Another vs State of U.P.

Aniket Maheshwari and 2 Others vs State of U.P. Others