Disposed

Faizan and 2 Others v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC11 Jul 2024ABAIL/6766/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in a case of alleged rioting and assault. Applicants claimed parity with co-accused already granted bail; State opposed. Court enlarged applicants on anticipatory bail till conclusion of trial on personal bond with standard conditions, without expressing opinion on merits.

What did the court decide?

Applicants released on anticipatory bail till conclusion of trial on Rs. 50,000 personal bond each with two sureties, subject to conditions.

Faizan and 2 Others vs State of U.P. — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:120799

¶2

Court No. - 66

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 6766 of 2024 Applicant :- Faizan And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Syed Abbas Shaukat Abidi,Syed Ahmed Faizan,Syed Ali Shaukat (Abidi) Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned Additional Government Advocate for the State.

¶6

This anticipatory bail application (under Section 438 Cr.P.C.) has been moved seeking bail in Case Crime No.367 of 2023, under Sections 147, 148, 323, 324, 341, 308, 452, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Khatauli, District Muzaffarnagar.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that applicants have been falsely implicated in the present case just to harass the applicants. The applicants has never committed any offence as alleged in the impugned FIR. The impugned FIR has been lodged as a counter blast. Learned counsel for the applicants is claiming parity of co-accused persons, namely, Mohammad Suhail, Mohammad Ammar, Sammo @ Shamsheeda, Mohammad Zubair and Salim have already been granted anticipatory till conclusion of trial by this Court, copy of the order has been annexed as Annexue No.9 to the affidavit filed in support of application. The applicants are having no previous criminal history.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the applicants but could not dispute the aforesaid contentions raised by learned counsel for the applicants.

¶9

Hence without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of applicants, they are directed to be enlarged on anticipatory bail as per the Constitution Bench judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi)- 2020 SCC Online SC 98 . The future contingencies regarding anticipatory bail being granted to applicants shall also be taken care of as per the aforesaid judgment of the Apex Court.

¶10

In the event of arrest, the applicants shall be released on anticipatory bail. Let the applicants- Faizan, Shadaan and Arif, involved in the aforesaid crime be released on anticipatory bail till conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶11

(i) The applicants shall co-operate with the Investigating Officer during investigation and shall report to the Investigating Officer as and when required for the purpose of conducting investigation;

¶12

(ii) The applicants 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;

¶13

(iii) The applicants shall not leave the country during the currency of trial without prior permission from the concerned trial Court.

¶14

(iv) The applicants shall surrender their passport, if any, to the concerned Court forthwith. Their passport will remain in custody of the concerned Court.

¶15

(v) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence and the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law to ensure presence of the applicants.

¶16

(vi) In case, the applicants misuse the liberty of bail, the Court concerned may take appropriate action in accordance with law and judgment of Apex Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi) 2020 SCC Online SC 98.

¶17

(vii) The applicants shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court default of this condition is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of their bail and proceed against them in accordance with law.

¶18

In default or misuse of any of the conditions, the Public Prosecutor/ Investigating Officer/ first informant-complainant is at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicants.

¶19

With the aforesaid observations/ directions, the application is disposed of.

¶20

Order Date :- 29.7.2024/Ajeet

¶21

Digitally signed by :- AJEET KUMAR PATEL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Faizan and 2 Others v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Faizan and 2 Others 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

Shailesh Kumar Gupta and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. and Another

Ramesh Chandra and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Smt. Shivi Kudesia and Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. the Prin. Secy. Home, U.P. Lucknow and Another

Amar Singh vs State of U.P. and Another

Sharnbeer vs State of U.P.

Krishna Kumar Kalra (Since Deceased) through His Lr's Vs U.P.Khadi and Village Indurtries Board Lko.through Its