Allahabad High Court
Mohammad Irfan vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. ... on 25 July, 2022
Bench: Krishan Pahal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 16
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 1079 of 2022
Applicant :- Mohammad Irfan
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko And Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Manoj Kumar Singh,Ravindra Gupta
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.
Heard Sri Manoj Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Vinay Kumar Sahi, 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.435 of 2021, under Sections 376 and 506 IPC at Police Station- Dargah Sharif, District Bahraich with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.
As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have entered into physical relationship with the first informant for about six years before lodging the present FIR. When the informant insisted for marriage, the applicant is stated to have clicked some obscene photographs of her and threatened her to make them viral on social media.
Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is an admitted case that the applicant and the informant were in physical relationship since about six years but he was unable to marry the informant as she had knowledge that the applicant was already married. Learned counsel has further stated that there is no evidence whatsoever pertaining to any photographs having been clicked or having been in possession of the informant or the investigating agency whatsoever. Learned counsel has further stated that the prosecutrix herein has refused to get herself medically examined and there is an application on record filed by the wife of the applicant on 24.11.2021 i.e. about eight days before lodging the present FIR against the informant. The charge-sheet has already been filed against the applicant. There are no criminal antecedents of the applicant. The applicant was granted interim protection till the investigation by this Court. Learned counsel has also stated that the applicant has co-operated in the investigation and undertakes that he will cooperate in the trial also failing which the State can move appropriate application for cancellation of the anticipatory bail.
The prayer for anticipatory bail have been vehemently opposed by learned A.G.A. but could not dispute the fact that as per his instructions, the investigating officer does not have any of the said alleged obscene photographs whatsoever.
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 "Shri Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia and Others vs. State of Punjab, (1980) 2 SCC 656". 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- Mohammad Irfan be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the 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 default of any of the conditions mentioned above, the investigating officer shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant;
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 or deciding the regular bail application.
Order Date :- 25.7.2022
Ravi Kant
