Mohd. Arif Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:83841

Court No. - 34

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 9459 of 2021 Applicant :- Mohd. Arif Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Anr. Counsel for Applicant :- Rahul Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Rahul Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Uttam Kumar Gond, learned A.G.A. for the State through video conferencing and perused the material on record.

¶6

The present bail application has been filed on behalf of applicant Mohd. Arif under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, with a prayer to release him on anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 0310 of 2021, for offence punishable under Sections 3/5/8 of U.P. Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act, registered at Police StationGosaiganj, District-Sultanpur till the conclusion of trial, after rejecting the anticipatory bail application of the applicant by Sessions Judge, Sultanpur vide order dated 26.07.2021.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. The applicant was neither named in the F.I.R. nor involved in any such offence as alleged in the F.I.R. It is further submitted that the name of the applicant has surfaced on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused.

¶8

It is further submitted that the applicant is no more required for custodial interrogation. The applicant has no previous criminal history. It is further submitted that he has not undergone any imprisonment after conviction by any court of law in relation to any cognizable offence previously. It is further contended that the applicant is ready to participate in the investigation. The applicant was granted interim anticipatory bail by the co-ordinate Bench of this court vide order dated 21.02.2022.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the

¶10

applicant but he has not refuted the fact that the applicant has no criminal antecedent to his credit.

¶11

It is settled position of law that the anticipatory bail being an extraordinary privilege should be granted only in exceptional cases. Parameters for grant of anticipatory bail in a serious offence are required to be satisfied, where the Court is prima facie of the view that the applicant has falsely roped in the crime and would not misuse his liberty.

¶12

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC Online SC 98, ground for grant of anticipatory bail is made out.

¶13

In case of arrest, the applicant, Mohd. Arif is directed to be enlarged on anticipatory bail in above case crime number till the conclusion of trial, on his furnishing personal bond of Rs.25,000/and two sureties each of like amount before the Station House Officer of Police Station/Court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶14

(i) The applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by the police officer as and when required, if investigation is in progress;

¶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 such person from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

¶16

(iii) The applicant shall not leave the country without the previous permission of the Court and if he has passport, the same shall be deposited by him before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned/Court concerned;

¶17

(iv) The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by the applicant along-with a self attested identity proof of the said person (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number to which the said Aadhar Card is linked ;

¶18

(v) The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the

¶19

official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.

¶20

The Investigating Officer will continue with the investigation, if it is in progress and will not be affected by this order.

¶21

A copy of this order shall also be produced before the S.P/S.S.P concerned by the applicants, within a week, if the investigation is still in progress, who shall ensure compliance of this order.

¶22

With the aforesaid directions, the present Anticipatory Bail Application is allowed.

¶23

Order Date :- 13.12.2024 A.K.T.

¶24

Digitally signed by :- ASHOK KUMAR TRIPATHI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Mohd. Arif v. State of U.P. and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd. Arif v. State of U.P. and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Asgar Ali vs State of U.P. and Another

Arun Kumar Dean vs State of U.P. and Another

Jagat Bahadur and Anothers vs State of U.P. and Anothers

Ashish Kumar Mishra Vs State of U.P. Thru.Prin.Secy.Deptt. of Home and Another

Tabrej Vs State of U.P. Thru Prin.Secy. Home and Anr.

Sajid Vs State of up Thru. Prin. Secy. Home and Anr.