Disposed

Mohammad Haneef and 7 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko.

Allahabad HC9 May 2024ABAIL/978/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court granted two weeks to the complainant to file counter affidavits in an anticipatory bail application regarding property disputes. The court listed the case for final decision on 30.05.2024, granting an interim liberty in case of arrest subject to conditions.

What did the court decide?

Time granted for filing counter-affidavits. List for final decision on 30.05.2024. Interim liberty granted in case of arrest on furnishing bond and surety subject to conditions.

Mohammad Haneef and 7 Others vs State of U.P. Thru… — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Court No. - 16

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 978 of 2024

¶3

Applicant :- Mohammad Haneef And 7 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko.

¶4

Counsel for Applicant :- Mohammad Ehtesham Khan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Romit Seth

¶5

Hon'ble Mohd. Faiz Alam Khan,J.

¶6

Heard Shri M. E. Khan, learned counsel for the applicants as well as learned A.G.A. for the State, Shri Romit Seth, learned counsel appearing for the informant/complainant and perused the record.

¶7

The present anticipatory bail application has been moved by the accused/applicants- Mohammad Haneef, Mehndi Hasan (as per F.I.R. Mehndi), Israrul Hasan, Fakhrul Hasan, Mohammad Fareed, Mohammad Saif Ansari, Mohammad Faiz Ansari and Saeedunnisha in Case Crime No.307 of 2022, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C, Police Station Kotwali, District Sitapur, with the prayer to enlarge them on anticipatory bail as they are apprehending arrest in the above-mentioned case.

¶8

Learned counsel for the accused-applicants while pressing the anticipatory bail application submits that the applicants have been falsely implicated in this case and they have not committed any offence as claimed by the prosecution.

¶9

While drawing attention of this Court towards many documents enclosed with this application, it is submitted that the parties are litigating before the revenue court pertaining to their rights, which they are drawing from the deceased Jagdish Chandra. Elaborating further, it is submitted that late Jagdish Chandra had executed a 'Will' on 28.10.1978 in favour of his nephew one Lalji Lal and thereafter the same was transferred by Lalji Lal to Shamshuddin, Pramod Kumar Srivastava, Peer Mohammad and Shanti Mishra through a sale deed and later on the above mentioned purchasers had executed a sale deed on 19.05.2005 in favour of the applicants and later on the applicants have executed an agreement to sale in favour of Shashank Deep and Pushpendra.

¶10

It is vehemently submitted that it is a case, where no property has been transferred and the parties are litigating before the

¶11

revenue court and there is no element of wrongful gain or wrongful loss. The intended purchaser namely Shashank Deep has been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 24.04.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 CR.P.C. No.815 of 2024 and another coaccused Vinod Kumar has also been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 22.03.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 CR.P.C. No.650 of 2024.

¶12

It is also submitted that the applicants are law abiding citizen and there is no apprehension that after being granted facility of anticipatory bail, they may flee from the course of law or otherwise misuse the liberty.

¶13

Shri Romit Seth, learned counsel appearing for the informant/complainant, at this stage, submits that he be permitted to file detailed objections/counter affidavit in this case vis-a-vis prayer of anticipatory bail of the applicants as the recording of name of the applicants in the revenue record is still in doubt.

¶14

Learned A.G.A. also submits that sometime may be granted for the purpose of filing of counter affidavit/objections.

¶15

Having regard to the submissions made by learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the complainant/informant, two weeks' time is granted for filing of counter affidavit/objections.

¶16

10. Accordingly, list this case on 30.05.2024.

¶17

It is provided that till the next date of listing in the event of arrest of the applicants- Mohammad Haneef, Mehndi Hasan (as per F.I.R. Mehndi), Israrul Hasan, Fakhrul Hasan, Mohammad Fareed, Mohammad Saif Ansari, Mohammad Faiz Ansari and Saeedunnisha involved in the above noted case, under any process issued by the trial court, they shall be released on anticipatory bail on their furnishing personal bond of Rs.50,000/- each with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the Police Station concerned/Investigating Officer/trial court with the following conditions:

¶18

i. The applicant shall not leave India during the pendency of trial without prior permission from the concerned trial Court.

¶19

ii. The applicant shall Cooperate in the investigation in case of further investigation and will make himself available as and when required by the Investigating officer of the case, even for

¶20

the recovery of any fact.

¶21

iii. The applicant shall not make any attempt to influence the prosecution witnesses and will also not commit any crime during his release on anticipatory bail.

¶22

In case of default of any of above conditions, 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 applicant.

¶23

List as directed on 30.05.2024, on which date, this application shall be decided finally.

¶24

Order Date :- 15.5.2024 Anupam S/-

¶25

Digitally signed by :- ANUPAM SINGH PATEL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Mohammad Haneef and 7 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohammad Haneef and 7 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Amit Dixit Vs Smt. Neeta Tiwari and Others

C/M Board of Trustees Balrampur Girls H. School Thru Sachiv Vs State of U.P. Thru Secy. Secondary Education and Others

Rahul Kumar and Others Vs State of U.P. Thru Secy. Society and Chits Funds U.P. and Ors.

Sumit Arora Vs Union of India Throu.Its Prin.Secy.Ministry Human and Ors.

Rajat Tiwari Vs Union of India Throu.Its Prin.Secy.Ministry of Human and Ors.

Smt. Rekha Devi Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Basic Education Lko. and 4 Others