Irshad vs State of U.P. and Another

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:8547

Court No. - 70

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 11139 of 2024

Applicant :- Irshad Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Pramod Kumar,Sanjay Kumar Rajbhar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA on behalf of the State and perused the record.

¶7

This anticipatory bail application (under section 438 Cr.P.C.) has been moved seeking bail in Case Crime No.335 of 2023, under Sections 409, 420, 120-B, 411 I.P.C., P.S. Pahasu, District Bulandshahar.

¶8

Counsel for the applicant submits that applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. He next submitted that co-accused Dilshad had filed Criminal Misc.Anticipatory Bail Application before this Court and this Court by order dated 22.11.2024 allowed the anticipatory bail application of the applicant. Applicant has no criminal history. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he would not misuse the liberty of bail and would cooperate with the investigation.

¶9

Learned AGA opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the applicant with the contention that the applicant is not entitled for anticipatory bail as prima facie case is made out.

¶10

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusation and antecedents, the applicant is entitled to be released on anticipatory bail in this case for the limited period considering the exception considered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC Online SC 98.

¶11

Let the applicant Irshad, who is involved in the aforesaid crime, be released on anticipatory bail till submission of police report under section 173(2) Cr.P.C. on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court concerned with the following conditions :-

¶12

(i) The applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

¶13

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

¶14

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

¶15

In default of any of the conditions, the Investigating Officer is at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant.

¶16

The Investigating Officer is directed to conclude the investigation of the present case in accordance with law expeditiously preferably within a period of three months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order independently without being prejudice by any observation made by this Court while considering and deciding the present anticipatory bail application of the applicant.

¶17

The application stands allowed .

¶18

Order Date :- 20.1.2025 SKD

¶19

Digitally signed by :- SURJIT KUMAR DEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Irshad v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Irshad v. State of U.P. and Another

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

Manoj Kesari vs State of U.P.

Dharmendra and 2 Others vs State of U.P.

Suggriv and Another vs State of U.P.

Santosh Shah vs State of U.P.

Sanju @ Rishabh Jaisawal vs State of Up

Wasim @ Saeed Afsar vs State of U.P.