Allowed

Mansoor Hussain Alvi v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC5 Sept 2023MCRCA/506/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a first application for anticipatory bail in connection with an offence punishable under Sections 420 and 34 of the IPC regarding illegal mutation of ancestral property, the High Court of Chhattisgarh granted anticipatory bail to the applicant, noting the lack of specific allegations against him and the existing bail of a co-accused.

What did the court decide?

The application for anticipatory bail is allowed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. with conditions, including execution of a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- and adherence to standard bail conditions.

Mansoor Hussain Alvi Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Cheating and Forgery | Chhattisgarh HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

M.Cr.C.(A) No. 506 of 2023

¶5

Mansoor Hussain Alvi, Aged about 76 years, S/o- Maqsood Hussain, R/oS.S. F/2 Samdadiya Complex, Cherital Road, Jabalpur (M.P.)

¶6

---- Applicant

¶7

Versus

¶8

State of Chhattisgarh, Through : Station House Officer, Police StationVidhansabha Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.)

¶9

Tafazzul Hussain, S/o- Late Abid Ali, R/o- S-5, Nusrat Bano Road Near Banke Transport Road, Huzur Bhopal (M.P.)

¶10

Abbas Hussain, S/o- Late Abid Ali, R/o- S-5, Nusrat Bano Road Near Banke Transport Road, Huzur Bhopal (M.P.)

¶11

---- Respondents

¶12

For Applicant : Mr. Ali Afzaal Mirza, Advocate For Respondent No.1/State : Mr. Lalit Jangde, Dy. Government Advocate

¶13

Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board

¶14

05.09.2023

¶15

The instant is the first application for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant. He is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No. 415/2022 registered at Police Station Vidhansabha, District Raipur (C.G.)for an offence punishable under Section 420 read with Section 34 of IPC.

¶16

The case of the prosecution, in a nutshell, is that Abbas Hussain and Tafazzul Hussain lodged a written complaint before the police station stating that the ancestral property, PC No. 109/39 situated at Village Saddu, bearing Khasra No. 366, admeasuring 1.761 hectares was illegally mutated by the present applicant alongwith co-accused namely Murtaza Ali by preparing a forged affidavit before the Tehsildar. The Tehsildar has passed the order of mutation on 11.11.2021 and the entire ancestral property has to be recorded in the name of 26 legal heirs including the complainant. The application for mutation was moved by Mariyam @ Dayma before the Tehsildar.

¶17

A specific query has been put to the counsel for the State as to what overt act the present applicant has committed. Learned counsel for the State would submit that in the F.I.R., there is only one allegation that the present

¶18

¶19

applicant is involved, but there is no specific allegation as to how he is involved.

¶20

Considering the fact that there is no allegation of any cheating, forgery etc. against the present applicant, further considering that the application for mutation was moved by Mariyam @Dayma and the order of mutation was passed by the Tehsildar on 11.11.2021, whereas the F.I.R. has been lodged on 14.10.2022 and the co-accused namely Murtaza Ali has already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court on 30.01.2023 passed in M.Cr.C.(A) No. 1554/2022, I am inclined to extend the benefit of Section 438 of Cr.P.C. to the present applicant. Accordingly, the application is allowed

¶21

It is directed that in the event of the arrest of the applicant in connection with the crime in question, he shall be released on anticipatory bail by the officer arresting him on his executing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer. The applicant shall also abide by the following conditions:-

¶22

i. He 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/her from disclosing such fact to the Court or Investigating Officer, as the case may be.

¶23

ii. He shall not act in any manner that will be prejudicial to a fair and expeditious trial, and

¶24

iii. He shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required.

¶25

iv. He shall not involve himself in any offence of a similar nature in the future.

¶26

The observations made in the course of this order are only for considering the case of the applicant on the application for grant of anticipatory bail. The concerned trial Court shall not be influenced or bound by any of the observations made hereinabove.

¶27

Sd/-

¶28

(Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge

¶29

vatti

Mansoor Hussain Alvi v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mansoor Hussain Alvi v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Budhen Singh Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Djoe Isac Thomas Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Madhusudan Agrawal Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Santosh Kumar Chandra Vs Smt. Sumitra Chandra

Nimish Sunil Agarwal Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Indraveer Singh Vs State of Chhattisgarh