Allahabad High Court
Javed Khan vs State Of U.P. on 30 October, 2018
Bench: Attau Rahman Masoodi
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
A.F.R.
Court No. - 13
Case :- BAIL No. - 8930 of 2018
Applicant :- Javed Khan
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Ali Jibran,Dheeraj Kumar Yadav,S.M.Alvi
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Attau Rahman Masoodi,J.
Heard learned counsel for the accused-applicant, learned A.G.A. and perused the record.
The assistance of Sri V.K. Shahi, learned Additional Advocate General was sought in the present case. Learned Additional Advocate General has informed that the State government for the purposes of carrying out investigation with respect to cyber crimes has a cyber cell in every district which comprises of the persons who are technically conversant and sound with the tracking of offences. It is also pointed out by him that locally the investigating officers are also trained to carry out necessary investigation skillfully on the basis of training so taken.
The court would expect the State government to consider this aspect of the matter independently and issue necessary circular in this regard and circulate the same through the District Magistrates of all the districts as well as the regional level police officers. The cyber crimes are becoming rampant day by day, therefore, it is expected that the State government shall effectuate the investigation and evolve scientifically a reliable mechanism to probe the cyber crimes.
The additional Advocate General shall inform the State government about this order passed today.
Insofar as the implication of the applicant Javed Khan is concerned, it is submitted that he has falsely been implicated in the present case and does not have any criminal history, however the allegation levelled in the F.I.R. is to the effect that the applicant is in the whatsapp group but no direct role has been assigned to him and the role of the applicant as per allegation appears to be distinguishable from the other co-accused Mohd. Mohishin Khan. There is no criminal history against the applicant. The charge-sheet has already been filed. The applicant is in jail since 27.6.2018.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, perusing the record and also considering the nature of allegations, arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, a case for bail is made out.
Let the applicant namely Javed Khan involved in Case Crime No. 338 of 2018, under Sections 295A IPC and Section 66 and 67 of I.T. Act, Police Station Mohammadi, District Kheri be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Magistrate/Court concerned, subject to following conditions :-
(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.
(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.
Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the Principal Secretary, Home, forthwith, for necessary compliance.
Order Date :- 30.10.2018
kanhaiya
