Allahabad High Court
Sageer vs State Of U.P. on 20 May, 2022
Bench: Ajit Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 85
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 3954 of 2022
Applicant :- Sageer
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Rajneesh Tripathi
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ajit Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State.
The instant anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Sageer with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 326 of 2021, under section 3/5/8 U.P. Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act, P.S. Dilari, district-Moradabad.
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.
As per prosecution case, three k.g. of beef has been recovered in this case and accused persons succeeded in fleeing away from the place of occurrence.
Learned counsel for the applicant has contended that similarly place other co-accused Rasheed and Anish have been granted anticipatory bail by another Bench of this Court and hence the applicant, whose case stands on a same footing than that of co-accused Rasheed and Anish, is entitled to be enlarged on anticipatory bail on the ground of parity.
Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the applicant, but does not dispute the claim of parity.
Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusations and the antecedents of the applicant, considering the gravity of the offence, considering the Constitution Bench judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi)- 2020 SCC Online SC 98 and in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation passed in Special Leave to Appeal (Criminal) No. 5191 of 2021
In the event of arrest of the applicant shall be released on anticipatory bail till the submission of police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C., if any, before the competent court/S.H.O. concern on their furnishing personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount of Rs. 50,000/- to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer concerned with the following conditions:-
1. The applicant shall not leave India during the pendency of trial without prior permission from the concerned trial Court and will co-operate during investigation.
2. The applicant shall surrender his passport, if any, to the concerned trial Court forthwith. His passport will remain in custody of the concerned trial Court.
3. 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.
4. In case, the applicants misuses the liberty of bail, the trial Court concerned may take appropriate action in accordance with law and judgment of Apex Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi)- 2020 SCC Online SC 98.
Order Date :- 20.5.2022
Faridul
