Allowed

Tahir Hussain and 4 Others v. State of Up and Another

Allahabad HC6 Sept 2024ABAIL/8825/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court allowed an anticipatory bail application for five applicants accused of dowry harassment and criminal conspiracy. The court noted they were close relatives of a co-accused in a settled marriage dispute and had not been arrested earlier during investigation, removing the need for custodial interrogation.

What did the court decide?

Applicants released on anticipatory bail till conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each, subject to standard conditions.

Tahir Hussain and 4 Others vs State of Up and… — Matrimonial and Divorce | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:145095

¶2

Court No. - 70

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 8825 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Tahir Hussain And 4 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Mohammad Waseem Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.

¶6

Dr. S.B.Maurya learned AGA-I, for the State, apprised the Court that he has received the instructions, therefore, the instant anticipatory bail application may be finally disposed off.

¶7

Heard Sri Mohammad Waseem, learned counsel for the applicant and Dr. S.B.Maurya, learned AGA-I, for the State.

¶8

The instant anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicants with the prayer to release them on anticipatory bail in FIR/Case Crime No.26 of 2023, under Sections 406,504 and 506 IPC and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Quila, District Bareilly during pendency of the trial.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that applicants are close relatives of co-accused Imran Hussain and the marriage of Imran Hussain was settled with the daughter of the informant but unfortunately the marriage could not be solemnized and thereafter on the basis of false allegation applicants have been made accused in the present matter.

¶10

He further submits that all the alleged offences are triable by Magistrate First Class with maximum punishment of seven years and, therefore, during investigation applicants were not arrested in view of the order dated 2.2.2023 passed by Division Bench of this

¶11

Court passed in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 1776 of 2023.

¶12

He further submits that now charge sheet has been filed and applicants are having apprehension, if they will appear before the court concerned then they will be sent to jail.

¶13

He further submits that after submission of charge sheet, there is no need of custodial interrogation.

¶14

He further submits that applicants are not having any previous criminal history and, therefore, applicants should be enlarged on anticipatory bail till the conclusion of trial.

¶15

Per contra, learned AGA although opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the argument on facts advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶16

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.

¶17

Considering the argument advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant and the fact that during investigation applicants were not arrested and apprehension of custody raised by applicants cannot be ruled out, in my view, applicants are entitled to be released on anticipatory bail till the conclusion of the trial.

¶18

Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail anticipatory application is allowed.

¶19

In the event of arrest of the applicant s-Tahir Hussain, Ayesha, Sahir, Faizan and Tarik involved in the aforesaid case crime number, shall be released on bail till the conclusion of the trial case on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Presiding Officer/Court

¶20

concerned with the conditions:-

¶21

(i) that 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 him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶22

(ii) that the applicants shall not leave India without previous permission of the court;

¶23

(iii) that the applicants shall not temper with the evidence during the trial;

¶24

(iv) that the applicants shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness;

¶25

(v) that the applicants shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;

¶26

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

¶27

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

¶28

Order Date :- 6.9.2024 SKM

¶29

Digitally signed by :- SHRAVANA KUMAR MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Tahir Hussain and 4 Others v. State of Up and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tahir Hussain and 4 Others 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Anju Verma vs State of U.P. and Another

Liyakat Ali vs State of Up

Jay Kishor vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Smt Neeraj Devi vs State of U.P. and Another

Yaqub and 4 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt Meera and 2 Others vs State of Up and Another