Allahabad High Court
Nizamuddin @ Shahil vs State Of U.P. And Another on 26 April, 2023
Bench: Krishan Pahal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 83
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 2277 of 2023
Applicant :- Nizamuddin @ Shahil
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Anjit Kumar Verma
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.
1. List has been revised.
2. Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record.
3. Heard Sri Vikas Chandra Tiwari, Advocate holding brief of Sri Anjit Kumar Verma, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri V.K. Gupta, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record.
4. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicants in Case Crime No.240 of 2019 registered under Sections 420, 323, 504 IPC and 3/4 Muslim Marriage Act at Police Station- Janakpuri, District Shaharanpur with a prayer to enlarge them on anticipatory bail.
5. As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have married the informant as per Muslim Rites on 04.05.2019 at Shaharanpur. The applicant is stated to have misrepresented before the informant that he is a government engineer and shall keep her well but later on, it came up to her knowledge that the applicant was already married to another women and had children to his previous marriage. The informant is stated to have gone to the police station whereby she was coerced into entering a compromise by her, as such she was made to sign on blank papers and she was subjected to triple talaq by the applicant.
6. Learned counsel for the applicants has stated that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. The FIR is delayed by about one month and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. The informant/victim herein is a professional lady and is used to trap several persons. There is FIR No.17 of 2018 lodged by her against Mustafa s/o Akhtar, which is filed as SA-1 to the supplementary affidavit filed today. Another FIR No.175 of 2019 was instituted against the informant, who is also known by Nuri, by Ashwini Kumar at PS- Janakpuri, Shaharanpur. The applicant has nothing to do with the said offence. Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicants to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against them. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicants have also been touched upon at length. There are no criminal antecedents of the applicant. The applicants have apprehension of their arrest. Learned counsel for the applicants undertakes that they have co-operated in the investigation and are ready to do so in trial also failing which the State can move appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail.
7. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the anticipatory bail application but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicants.
8. On due consideration to the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the applicants as well as learned A.G.A. and considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of the applicants, the applicants are 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 applicants shall also be taken care of as per the aforesaid judgment of the Apex Court.
9. In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicants is allowed. Let the accused-applicants- Nizamuddin @ Shahil be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on anticipatory bail till the conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-
(i). that the applicants shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;
(ii). that the applicants 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 them from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence;
(iii). that the applicants shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court;
(iv). that in case charge-sheet is submitted the applicants shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial;
(v). that the applicants shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;
(vi). that the applicants shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;
(vii). that in case of breach of any of the above conditions the court below shall have the liberty to cancel the bail.
10. It is made clear that observations made hereinabove are exclusively for deciding the instant anticipatory bail application and shall not affect the trial.
(Krishan Pahal, J.)
Order Date :- 26.4.2023
Ravi Kant
