Jalim Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. and Another

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:25941

Court No. - 13

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 17 of 2025

Applicant :- Jalim Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ashutosh Bajpai Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of State and perused the record.

¶7

As per office report dated 12.03.2025, opposite party no.2 has been served personally but has not put in appearance.

¶8

This first anticipatory bail application has been filed with regard to Case Crime No.13 of 2022 under Section 379 IPC and Sections 3/5/8 Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act, Police Station Naveen Modern Police Thana, District Shravasti.

¶9

Earlier vide order dated 17.02.2025, interim anticipatory had been granted to the applicant, which is as follows:-

¶10

"Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶11

The instant application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 13 of 2022, under Section 379 of IPC and Sections 3/5/8 of Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act, Police Station Naveen Modern Police Thana, District Shravasti.

¶12

It has been contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the the FIR is belated by one year and there is no plausible explanation to the same. Further submission is that due to anonymity, the applicant is named in the First Information Report, though the story is otherwise. He also submits that without there being any cogent piece of evidence, the chargesheet has been filed and there is no complaint that the applicant is not cooperating in the investigation proceeding. Further submission is that the applicant has 3 cases criminal history which has been explained and he undertakes that he will always cooperate in the trial proceedings. He next submits that there is an acute apprehension that the police will arrest the present applicant and therefore, he may be enlarged on anticipatory bail.

¶13

On the other hand, learned AGA appearing for the State has opposed the contentions aforesaid and submits that applicant is involved in committing the offence, as such, he is not entitled for any relief.

¶14

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and after perusal of the record, it transpires that the FIR has been lodged with delay of one year and there is no plausible explanation of the same; the applicant has been named in the FIR due to anonymity; chargesheet has been filed without there being any cogent piece of evidence; the applicant has explained 3 cases criminal history and he is ready to appear before the Investigating Officer as and when required, this Court finds it to be a fit case for grant of interim anticipatory bail.

¶15

Accordingly, till the next date of listing, the present applicant-Jalim, shall be released forthwith, in the event of his arrest, in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on an interim anticipatory bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two solvent sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶16

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

¶17

(ii) that 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 him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence; (iii) that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court;

¶18

(iv) that in case chargesheet is submitted the applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial;

¶19

(v) that the applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness;

¶20

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

¶21

(vii) that in case of breach of any of the above conditions the court concerned shall have the liberty to cancel the bail.

¶22

Let notice be issued to opposite party no. 2, returnable at an early date.

¶23

Steps be taken within a week.

¶24

If the steps are taken, the office shall proceed accordingly.

¶25

List/put up this matter in the third week of March, 2025.

¶26

In the meantime, learned counsel for the State as well as opposite party no. 2 shall file their counter affidavits."

¶27

It appears that subsequently co-accused Munnauwar @ Ata Mohammad has also been granted anticipatory bail in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application No. 377 of 2025.

¶28

Learned Additional Government Advocate has also filed counter affidavit which does not indicate any aspect different from the stage when interim anticipatory had been granted to applicant.

¶29

In view thereof, the interim anticipatory bail granted vide order dated 17.02.2025 is hereby made absolute subject to following conditions.

¶30

In view of the aforesaid, the present anticipatory bail application is hereby allowed while extending anticipatory bail to the applicant, namely, Jalim till disposal of the trial subject to the following conditions:-

¶31

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

¶32

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

¶33

(iii) that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court;

¶34

(iv) that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted; and

¶35

(v) that the applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶36

In case of default, it would be open for the Investigating Agency to move application for vacation of this interim protection.

¶37

Order Date :- 5.5.2025 Satish

¶38

Digitally signed by :- SATISH KUMAR BHARATI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Jalim v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jalim v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Roshni Kumari and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Durgesh Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Umesh Kumar Pal @ Umesh Pal Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Jalim vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. and Another

Ritik Awasthi vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko.

Kailash vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko