Allahabad High Court
Ikram Khan And 2 Others vs State Of U.P. And Another on 11 August, 2023
Bench: Krishan Pahal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:163196
Court No. - 72
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 2502 of 2023
Applicant :- Ikram Khan And 2 Others
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Sunil Kumar Tiwari
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Sudhir Kumar (Chandraul),Vijeta Kushwaha
Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.
1. List has been revised. Learned counsel for the informant is not present.
2. Heard Sri Sunil Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri R.P. Patel, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record.
3. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicants in Case Crime No.74 of 2022, registered under Sections 498-A, 323, 354, 307, 376/511, 377, 504, 506 I.P.C. and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, at Police Station- Mahila Thana, District Meerut with a prayer to enlarge them on anticipatory bail.
4. Counter affidavit filed on behalf of the State is already on record. Learned counsel for the applicant does not propose to file any rejoinder affidavit.
5. The applicant no.1 is father-in-law, applicant no.2 is mother-in-law and applicant no.3 is sister-in-law of the informant. As per prosecution story, the marriage of the son of applicant no.1 is stated to have been solemnized with the informant as per the Muslim rites on 4.10.2015. The applicants and other family members are stated to have subjected her to cruelty for demand of dowry and on 29.4.2021 at about 10:00 p.m. they are even stated to have assaulted her to cause her death.
6. Learned counsel for the applicants has stated that the applicants have been falsely implicated in this case. The injury report does not corroborate the prosecution story. The victim has not sustained any injury on the body part. The present FIR is clear misuse of dowry acts. The allegations are per se false. The applicants have no criminal history to their credit. 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. 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- Ikram Khan, Smt. Saida and Shaheba Rani 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.
Order Date :- 11.8.2023/ Vikas
[Krishan Pahal, J.]
