Irfan Vs State of U.P.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:19169

Court No. - 73

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 41401 of 2024

Applicant :- Irfan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mohammad Ausaf,Mohd Irfan,Shadab Ali Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J.

¶6

Counter affidavit filed by learned AGA is taken on record.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶8

The present bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in case crime No. 86 of 2023, under Section 147, 384, 506, 201, 120-B, 195-A, 34 IPC, Section 42-B of Prisons Act, Section 8/13 of Prevention of Corruption Act and Section 7 of Criminal Law Amendment Act, police station Bithari Chainpur, District Bareilly with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail.

¶9

The first information report of this case was lodged by the Incharge of Police Post-New Jail, Bareilly on 07.03.2023 against Ashraf, Saddam, Lalla Gaddi, Dayaram @ Nanhey, Shivhari Awasthi and associates of Ashraf and some unknown officials/ employees of the Central Jail. Said Ashraf is brother of notorious gangster Atique Ahmad and he was lodged in Central Jail- 2, district Bareilly. It was alleged that an information was received that Constable Shivhari Awasthi with the help of Saddam, Lalla Gaddi and jail officials, had been indulging in arranging meetings of visitors with Ashraf in jail in illegal manner and that 6-7 persons have met said Ashraf on a single I.D. The said meetings

¶10

(commonly termed as 'Milai') were held after prescribed time and against the provisions of Jail manual. Various serious cases are pending in different courts against Ashraf and he used to hatch conspiracy to kill police and prosecution officers and to threat the witnesses in order to turn them hostile. Ashraf, along with other persons, indulged in extending threats and demanding ransom etc. He used to make phone calls and after that the call detail history used to be deleted. The jail officials/employees are providing several facilities to Ashraf by obtaining presents and illegal gratification. Food and other items were being provided to Ashraf from jail canteen, which is being run by Dayaram @ Nanhey, in connivance of jail officials. Due to these activities, the possibility of commission of some heinous offence cannot be ruled out. On the basis of these allegations, the first information report was registered under Section 147, 384, 506, 201, 120-B, 195-A, 34 IPC, Section 42-B/54 of Prisons Act, Section 7/8/13 of Prevention of Corruption Act and Section 7 of Criminal Law Amendment Act.

¶11

It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant-accused is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. Applicant is not named in the first information report. The first information report was lodged against co-accused Ashraf, Saddam, Lalla Gaddi, Dayaram @ Nanhey, Shivhari Awasthi and associates of Ashraf and some unknown officials/ employees of the Central Jail. During investigation, the involvement of applicant was shown on the basis of statement of Mohd. Raza @ Lalla Gaddi after 45 days of the lodging of first information report. As per statement of said co-accused, in the CCTV footage of 11.02.2023 of concerned jail, applicant along with other coaccused persons was shown visiting jail to meet above referred Ashraf. Except that there is no evidence against applicant. It is

¶12

further submitted that co-accused persons, namely, Mohd. Raza @ Lalla Gaddi, Dayaram @ Nanhey and Shivhari Awasthi, who were named in the first information report, have already been granted bail by this Court. Similarly, placed co-accused Rashid Ali, Furkan Navi Khan, Mohd. Sarfuddin, Manoj Kumar Gaud, Mohd. Farhad @ Guddu, Mohd. Arif and Atin Zafar have also been enlarged on bail by this Court. It is submitted that case of applicant is on better footing than those co-accused persons, who have already been released on bail. Criminal history of one case has been shown against the applicant. Lastly, it was submitted that applicant is in jail since 19.09.2024 and that in case applicant is enlarged on bail, applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶13

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that during investigation, involvement of applicant was found on the basis of CCTV footage and statement of co-accused. It was stated that in CCTV footage of jail, on 11.02.2023 applicant and co-accused persons were seen going in to jail to meet co-accused Ashraf. Referring to the facts of the matter, it was submitted that there are serious allegations against the applicant. However, it could not be disputed that similarly placed co-accused persons have already been granted bail by this Court.

¶14

I have considered the submissions and perused the record.

¶15

Essentially the allegations against the applicant is that he along with co-accused persons has visited the jail in illegal manner, in order to meet co-accused Ashraf, who was lodged in the jail. Mainly the case is based on phone calls details of the accused persons and a CCTV footage, wherein applicant Irfan along with co-accused persons was seen going into the jail. Similarly placed co-accused persons have already been granted bail. It was pointed

¶16

out that said Ashraf has already passed away. The investigation is already complete and charge-sheet has been filed. Considering submissions of learned counsel for the parties, nature of accusations and all attending facts of the matter, without expressing any opinion on merits, a case for grant of bail is made out.

¶17

Let the applicant, Irfan involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned subject to the following conditions:

¶18

i. The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during trial.

¶19

ii. The applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses.

¶20

iii. The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶21

iv. The applicant shall not try to contact, threat or otherwise influence the complainant or any of the witness of the case.

¶22