Gullou @ Ehtiyad Ali vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:22840

¶2

Court No. - 13

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 275 of 2025

¶4

Applicant :- Gullou @ Ehtiyad Ali Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

¶5

Counsel for Applicant :- Surya Prakash,Arsh Bugga Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶6

Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J.

¶7

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

¶8

This first anticipatory bail application has been filed with regard to Case Crime No. 2678 of 2017 under Section 4/10 U.P. Protection of Trees Act,1976 & Section 41, 42 Indian Forest Act, 1927, Police Station Dhauraha, District Lakhimpur Kheri.

¶9

On 28.02.2025, the following order had been passed:-

¶10

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

¶11

The instant anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on anticipatory bail in Range Case No. 44/2016-17, Case No. 2678/2017, under sections 4/10 U.P. Protection of Trees Act, 1976 & Section 41, 42 of Indian Forest Act, 1927, Range- Dhaurahra, P.S.- Dhaurahra, District- Lakhimpur Kheri.

¶12

The contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the instant matter due to ulterior motive. He submits that the applicant is a poor farmer and he was never involved in committing the alleged offence. He next submits that it is an admitted fact that the applicant had cut 14 dry trees from his own field and under some misconception, the complaint is lodged against him. He further submits that the applicant is cooperating in the trial proceedings and he undertakes that he would remain present on each and every date before the trial court and would not abscond from the trial proceedings. He also submits that the issuance of summons as well as warrants never came in the knowledge of the applicant and it was only in the month of November 2024 that he came to know about the same. Further submitted that there is apprehension that the applicant will be arrested by the police, thus, submission is that he may be granted anticipatory bail.

¶13

On the other hand, learned AGA appearing for the State has opposed the submissions aforesaid and submits that the matter pertains to 2017 and the applicant is not cooperating in the trial proceedings and the warrants

¶14

have been issued against him, as such, he is not entitled to be released on anticipatory bail.

¶15

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, till the next date of listing, the present applicant- Gullou @ Ehtiyad Ali shall be released forthwith, in case of his arrest in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on an interim anticipatory bail on his furnishing 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;

¶18

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

¶19

(iv) that in case chargesheet is submitted the applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial; (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; (vii) that in case of breach of any of the above conditions the court concerned shall have the liberty to cancel the bail. List/put up this matter in the 1st week of April, 2025.

¶21

Further, the applicant is directed to remain present before the trial court on the next date fixed i.e., 15.3.2025, failing which the trial court shall inform this Court regarding his non-appearance.

¶22

In the meantime, the State may file counter affidavit."

¶23

It is submitted that in pursuance thereof, the applicant is fully co-operating the trial proceedings with his undertaking having already been indicated in the order dated 28.02.2025. Nothing adverse has been brought to the notice of this Court with regard to non-cooperation of applicant during trial proceedings.

¶24

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the interim anticipatory bail granted vide order dated 28.02.2025 is hereby made absolute subject to following conditions.

¶25

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

¶26

(i) that the applicant shall make himself available for

¶27

interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

¶28

(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;

¶29

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

¶30

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

¶31

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

¶32

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

¶33

Order Date :- 22.4.2025 Satish

¶34

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

Gullou @ Ehtiyad Ali v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gullou @ Ehtiyad Ali v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

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

C/M S.G.M Institute of Pharmacy, Ghazipur Thru. Director, Alok Kumar Trivedi Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. / Joint Secy., Deptt. of Technical Education, Lko. and Others

Pradeep Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Higher Education, Lko. and Others

Smt. Mithilesh Singh and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy., Deptt. of Institutional Finance, Lko. and Others

Umesh Kumar Sharma and Another Vs U.P. Nurses @ Midwives Council, Lko. Thru. Secy./ Registrar and Another

Society Sushant Golf City Ansal a.P.I., R.S. Samiti Thru. President Shailendra Singh and Anr. Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Finance Deptt., Lko. and Others

Pranjal Singh Rathour Thru. Father Shri Jaibind Singh Rathour Vs Assistant Secy., Central Board of Secondary Education, Allahabad and Others