Allowed

Jareef and 6 Others v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC27 Aug 2024ABAIL/8349/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge granted anticipatory bail to seven applicants in a case involvingSections 498A, IPC. The court noted vague allegations, no injury to the victim, and cooperation in investigation as key factors for release on bail with standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Application for anticipatory bail allowed subject to furnishing personal bond of Rs. 50,000 with two sureties and compliance with specific conditions.

Jareef and 6 Others vs State of U.P. — Domestic Violence | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:147243

¶2

Court No. - 72

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 8349 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Jareef And 6 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Pankaj Sharma,Prashant Sharma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

¶6

The statement of the victim under section 164 Cr.P.C., produced by the learned AGA, is taken on record.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Anupam Anand, learned Brief Holder for the State and perused the material placed on record.

¶8

This application under section 438 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.311 of 2023 (Case No. 1002/9 of 2024), under sections 498A, 452, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, P.S. Kotwali Sambhal, District Sambhal.

¶9

Counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the instant case. The applicant no.1 is fatherin-law, the applicant nos. 2, 3 and 5 are Nanad, the applicant no.4 is mother-in-law, the applicant no.6 is the Nandoi of the victim/opposite party no.2 and the applicant no.7 is family friend of applicant no.1. Vague and general allegations have been levelled against the applicants. In the alleged incident the opposite party no.2/victim has not sustained any injury. Charge-sheet has been filed against the applicants. The applicants have cooperated in the investigation. The applicants have no criminal history. The applicants have apprehension of their arrest in the above mentioned case.

¶10

Learned Brief Holder for the State opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.

¶11

Having regard to the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicants, considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of the applicants and in particular the fact that the vague and general allegations have been levelled against the

¶12

applicants, the fact that the opposite party no.2/victim has not received any injury, the fact that the applicants have co-operated in the investigation, without commenting on merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicants are entitled to be enlarged on anticipatory bail.

¶13

In the event of arrest, the applicants- Jareef, Shayba, Aysha, Smt. Khursheed Bano, Smt. Farhat Jahan, Arman, Yunus involved in the aforesaid case crime, be released on anticipatory bail during pendency of trial, on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶14

(i) The applicants shall make themeselves available on each and every date fixed in the matter by the court concerned;

¶15

(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 from disclosing such facts to the Court;

¶16

(iii) The applicants shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court and if they have passport, the same shall be deposited by them before the concerned court.

¶17

In default of any of the conditions, the court concerned is at liberty to pass appropriate orders for enforcing and compelling the same.

¶18

The application stands disposed of.

¶19

Order Date :- 10.9.2024 S.S.

¶20

Digitally signed by :- SIDDHARTH SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Jareef and 6 Others v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jareef and 6 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Yogendra vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt Jaywati vs State of U.P. and Another

Firari Yadav and Another vs State of U.P. and Another

Shashi Shekhar Pandey vs State of Up

Sanjay Kumar Yadav vs State of Up Others

Ambrish Pathak @ Sintoo Pathak vs State of U.P.