Allahabad High Court
Firasat Ali vs State Of U.P.And 3 Others on 21 December, 2022
Bench: Krishan Pahal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 78
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 11116 of 2022
Applicant :- Firasat Ali
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.And 3 Others
Counsel for Applicant :- Aditya Vardhan Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Vivek Kumar Singh
Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.
Heard Sri Aditya Vardhan Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Vivek Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the informant and Sri Sushil Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record.
The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No.292 of 2022, registered under Sections 452, 354, 504, 506 IPC & 7/8 POCSO Act, at Police Station- Katghar, District Moradabad with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.
As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have outraged the modesty of the informant on 02.05.2022 at about 3:00 pm with he was seen in a compromised state with Meenu Mumtaz. Later on, the provisions of POCSO were also added to the case because of the age of the victim.
Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the FIR is delayed by 27 days and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. Learned counsel has further stated that the present FIR is a counterblast to the FIR No.41 of 2022, which was lodged by Meenu Mumtaz, who happens to be the sister-in-law of the applicant and the victim happens to be the niece of the informant. Learned counsel has further stated that he has been falsely implicated in the case. He is not at all directly or indirectly related to the present subject matter. He has nothing to do with the said offence. The matter has been settled between the family with the help of senior members of the society and relatives. There are no criminal antecedents of the applicant. Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicant to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against him. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicant have also been touched upon at length. Learned counsel for the applicant undertakes that he has co-operated in the investigation and is ready to do so in trial also failing which the State can move appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the anticipatory bail application but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant.
On due consideration to the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. and considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of the applicant, the applicant is liable to be enlarged on anticipatory bail in view of the judgment of Supreme Court in the case of "Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi), (2020) 5 SCC 1". The future contingencies regarding the anticipatory bail being granted to applicant shall also be taken care of as per the aforesaid judgment of the Apex Court.
In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed. Let the accused-applicant- Firasat Ali be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on anticipatory bail till the conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the Police Station concerned/court concerned with the following conditions:-
1. that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;
2. 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;
3. that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court;
4. that in case charge-sheet is submitted the applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial;
5. that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;
6. that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;
7. that in case of breach of any of the above conditions the court below shall have the liberty to cancel the bail.
It is made clear that observations made hereinabove are exclusively for deciding the instant anticipatory bail application and shall not affect the trial.
Order Date :- 21.12.2022
Ravi Kant
