Allahabad High Court
Jameel Ahemad vs State Of U.P. on 2 June, 2022
Bench: Rahul Chaturvedi
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 67
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 2710 of 2022
Applicant :- Jameel Ahemad
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Namman Raj Vanshi
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.
(1) Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. Perused the record.
(2) The instant application is being moved by the applicant invoking the powers of Section 438 Cr.P.C. that he has every reason to believe that he may be arrested on the accusation of having committed a non-bailable offence in connection with Case Crime No.311 of 2017, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 504, 506, 427, 307 I.P.C., Police Station-Bhawanpur, District-Meerut.
(3) From the record, it is evident that the applicant has approached this Court after getting his anticipatory bail rejected from the Court of Addl. Distt. & Sessions Judge/Spl. Judge (SC/ST Act), Meerut vide order dated 12.7.2021.
(4) Prior notice of this bail application was served in the office of Government Advocate and as per Chapter XVIII, Rule 18 of the Allahabad High Court Rules and as per direction dated 20.11.2020 of this Court in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application u/s 438 Cr.P.C. No.8072 of 2020, Govind Mishra @ Chhotu Versus State of U.P., hence, this anticipatory bail application is being heard. Grant of further time to the learned A.G.A. as per Section 438(3) Cr.P.C. (U.P. Amendment) is not required.
(5) It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has got no previous criminal antecedents and he has not undergone any imprisonment after conviction by any court of law in relation to any cognizable offence previously. An assurance was also advanced by learned counsel for the applicant on behalf of the applicant that he would render all requisite co-operation and assistance in the process of law and with the investigating agency and shall not create any hindrance to reach to its logical conclusion and shall not flee away from the course of justice.
(6) Learned counsel for the applicant has strenuously argued that the applicant has been made target just to besmirch his reputation and belittle her in the public estimate by the informant. Number of arguments were advanced by learned counsel for the applicant to demonstrate the falsity of the accusation made in the FIR against the applicant by the informant. Learned counsel for the applicant has also relied upon the judgements in the cases of Arnesh Kumar vs State of Bihar and another, (2014) 8 SCC 273; Joginder Kumar vs State of U.P. and others (1994) 4 SCC 260 and Sanaul Haque vs State of U.P. and another, 2008 Cri. LJ 1998, to buttress his contentions.
(7) In this backdrop of legal as well as factual proposition, learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that after the investigation, the police has submitted charge sheet against the applicant. It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is one of named accused out of 15 named persons, who have been attributed a general role of assault upon the injured. The injured has sustained 9 injuries over his person but all are simple in nature. F.I.R. is full of exaggeration of the facts just to rope in as many as persons as they can. There is no specific role attributed to the applicant.
(8) Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the anticipatory bail application by mentioning that there is nothing on record to satisfy that the police personnel are after the applicant to arrest him. The alleged apprehension on behalf of applicant is imaginary and unfounded one. Learned A.G.A. has also submitted that in view of the seriousness of the allegations, the applicant is not entitled for any relaxation from this Court.
(9) Taking into account the gravity of the offence and after the close scrutiny of Section 438 Cr.P.C.(U.P. Act No.4 of 2019) and its relevant clauses and also taking the guidance of aforesaid judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court, the Court is satisfied that the applicant has made out the case for interim order protecting the liberty of applicant in connection with aforesaid case crime.
(10) Without expressing any opinion upon ultimate merits of the case either ways which may be adversely affect the trial of the case, the Court directs that in the event of arrest of the applicant in aforesaid case crime, he shall be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Presiding Officer/Court concerned till framing of charge, with the conditions that :
(i) The applicant shall make herself available before the court concerned as and when required to remain present.
(ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threats or comments to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing the correct facts to the court.
(iii) Learned trial court concerned is expected to make all necessary endeavours to gear up the matter and conclude the trial within a period of one and half year. During trial the accused-applicant would not leave the State of Uttar Pradesh without informing the court/authority concerned of the case.
(iv) In the event the applicant is having passport, he will have to surrender the same before the court concerned during trial.
(11) In the event, the applicant breaches or attempts to breach any of the aforesaid conditions or wilfully violate above conditions or abstains himself from the trial, learned trial court has every liberty and freedom to revoke the anticipatory bail after recording the reasons for the same.
(12) Since the interest of the applicant is being protected till framing of charge, it is directed that the applicant shall faithfully participate during trial and would not seek any unreasonable adjournments nor try to impress upon the witnesses adversely.
(13) The anticipatory bail application stands disposed off.
Order Date :- 2.6.2022
M. Kumar
