Disposed¶21

Josef @ Aurangjeb v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another

Allahabad HC29 May 2025ABAIL/604/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Josef @ Aurangjeb; anticipatory bail; Section 438 CrPC; Case Crime No. 948 of 2020; Sections 414, 413, 411 IPC; Kotwali Nagar, Pratapgarh; co-accused Arbaz confessional statement; protection till filing of police report S. 173(2) CrPC; Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi) (2020)5 SCC 1; Manish Mathur J.; Allahabad High Court Lucknow Bench; order dated 29.5.2025; application disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Conditional anticipatory bail granted: in the event of arrest, applicant Josef @ Aurangjeb to be released in Case Crime No. 948 of 2020 on a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount, protection operative till filing of police report under section 173(2) Cr.P.C., subject to four stated conditions (para 17-20). ¶21

Josef @ Aurangjeb vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy… — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶21

Issue for consideration

Whether anticipatory bail protection should be granted to applicant Josef @ Aurangjeb in respect of Case Crime No. 948 of 2020 (Sections 414, 413, 411 IPC, P.S. Kotwali Nagar, District Pratapgarh).

¶9

Court's answer

Prima facie, the court proceeded on the basis that the applicant was not apprehended from the spot and no recovery was made from him (the printed sentence omits 'not' before 'apprehended', mirroring counsel's undisputed submission in para 5; hence medium confidence).

¶14

Ratio / Principle

Prima facie, the applicant's name was introduced only on the basis of the alleged confessional statement of the co-accused who was apprehended from the spot.

¶14

Key takeaways

Previous criminal history of seven cases was stated to have been explained, and the applicant undertook to cooperate in the ongoing investigation.ratio¶14
Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the court held that the applicant's liberty may be protected till filing of the police report under section 173(2) Cr.P.C., in view of the Supreme Court's dictum in Sushila Aggarwal (2020)5 SCC 1.ratio¶15
In the event of arrest, the applicant shall be released on anticipatory bail in the aforesaid Case Crime number on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount, subject to the enumerated conditions (cooperation in investigation and no influence on witnesses; presence when called by arresting officer/I.O./S.H.O.; no leaving India without prior permission of the Court; investigating agency may move for vacation of protection on default).

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

ANTICIPATORY BAIL — GRANTED (conditional, till filing of police report under S. 173(2) Cr.P.C.) — Case Crime No. 948 of 2020, Ss. 414, 413, 411 IPC, P.S. Kotwali Nagar, District Pratapgarh — applicant Josef @ Aurangjeb prima facie neither apprehended from the spot nor any recovery from him; nomination solely through alleged confessional statement of co-accused Arbaz, apprehended after opening fire on police party (incident dated 17.10.2020) — previous criminal history of seven cases explained; applicant to cooperate in ongoing investigation — protection granted without expressing opinion on merits, in view of dictum of Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi), (2020)5 SCC 1 — release on personal bond with two sureties each in like amount, with conditions incl. presence when summoned by arresting officer/I.O./S.H.O., no exit from India without court permission, and option for investigating agency to seek vacation of protection on default.

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:32928

¶2

Court No. - 13

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 604 of 2025

¶4

Applicant :- Josef @ Aurangjeb Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko And Another

¶5

Counsel for Applicant :- Sukh Deo Singh,Paritosh Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶6

Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for applicant and learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of State.

¶8

In view of order being passed, notices to opposite party no.2 stand dispensed with.

¶9

This first anticipatory bail application has been filed with regard to Case Crime No. 948 of 2020, under Sections 414, 413, 411 IPC, Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Pratapgarh.

¶10

As per contents of First Information Report, the incident is said to have taken place on 17.10.2020 when the police party acting upon information supplied is said to have apprehended co-accused Arbaz when during the course of checking, he opened fire on the police party. It is stated that other persons escaped but was nominated by the apprehended person as the applicant.

¶11

It is submitted that applicant has been falsely implicated in allegations levelled against him and that he has neither been apprehended from the spot nor is there any recovery made from him and he has been nominated only on the basis of alleged confessional statement of co-accused Arbaz, who was apprehended from the spot. It is stated that investigation is still ongoing in which he undertakes to cooperate. It is submitted that previous criminal history of seven cases has already been explained.

¶12

Learned AGA as well has opposed anticipatory bail application but does not dispute the said facts.

¶13

Upon consideration of submissions advanced by learned counsel for parties and perusal of material on record, prima

¶14

facie, it appears that applicant was apprehended from the spot nor is there any recovery from him and his name has been introduced only on the basis of alleged confessional statement of co-accused, who was apprehended. Previous criminal history of seven cases has been explained and the applicant undertakes to cooperate in the investigation which is still ongoing.

¶15

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the liberty of the applicant may be protected till filing of police report under section 173(2) Cr.P.C. in view of dictum of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Sushila Aggarwal and others versus State (NCT of Delhi) and another (2020)5 SCC 1 .

¶16

In view of the above, it is provided that in the event of arrest, the applicant, Josef @ Aurangjeb , shall be released on anticipatory bail in aforesaid Case Crime number on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶17

(1) The applicant shall cooperate in the investigation and he will not influence the witnesses.

¶18

(2) The accused-applicant will remain present as and when the arresting officer/I.O./S.H.O. concerned call (s) for investigation/interrogation.

¶19

(3) The applicant shall not leave India without previous permission of the Court.

¶20

(4) In case of default, it would be open for the investigating agency to move application for vacation of this protection.

¶21

The application stands disposed of.

¶22

Order Date :- 29.5.2025 Renu/-

¶23

Digitally signed by :- RENU AGARWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Josef @ Aurangjeb v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Josef @ Aurangjeb v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rajesh Kumar Chaudhary vs State of U.P. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Sectt. Lko

Ashok Kumar Yadav vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and Another

Basant Kumar Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Brahma Nand vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Revenue, Lko. and 3 Others

Shivam Tripathi vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home, Lko and Another

Rajitram @ Subhash vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Home Deptt. Lko. and 3 Others