Allahabad High Court
Haseen Khan vs State Of U.P. on 12 January, 2023
Bench: Karunesh Singh Pawar
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 12
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 11278 of 2021
Applicant :- Haseen Khan
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Mohd. Waris Farooqui,Mohd Sartaj Ahmad
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and perused the record.
Vide order dated 06.10.2021, the applicant was granted interim protection by this Court. Gist of the issue involved in the present matter is given in the said order, which is extracted below:
"Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. who has accepted notice for the State.
This is an anticipatory bail application filed under section 438 Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail as the accused-applicant is apprehending his arrest in case crime No. 129/2021, under Section 379/411 I.P.C. and Section 26 of Indian Forest Act, 1927, Police Station Pachperwa, District Balrampur.
It is contended on behalf of the applicant that as per the F.I.R. the incident is of 10.07.2021 at 9:30. It is alleged in the F.I.R. that after receiving information through informer, the informer went inside the jungle and saw that some accused persons have made logs after cutting the Sagon tree and after litting the torch light the accused persons fled away, however, the informant has identified the Haseen, the present applicant who too fled away by the motorcycle. After two hours he has been seen coming from Vishunpur Vishram and thereafter he was stopped by the officials and vehicle was checked wherein two sagon logs was recovered. The accused was brought to the range premises, however in the way he again fled away after taking keys of the vehicle.
It is further submitted that the entire story of the prosecution in the F.I.R. is false and not trustworthy as per the F.I.R. The incident took place on 10.07.2021 whereas the F.I.R. has been lodged on 15.07.2021 without there being any explanation of delay. The story narrated in the F.I.R. is highly improbable as no person after committing offence will come there within couple of hours.
It has further been submitted that the nature and gravity of the accusation and the exact role of the accused has not been properly apprehended. It is further contended that the applicant has not previously undergone imprisonment on conviction by a Court in respect of any cognizable offence and there is no possibility of applicant to flee from the judicial proceedings.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant.
On due consideration to the arguments advance 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 as an interim measure may be enlarged on anticipatory bail in view of the Constitution Bench judgment of Supreme Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC online SC 98. 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 the even of arrest, let the accused-applicant Haseen Khan be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime on bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 25000/- and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting officer/investigating officer/S.H.O. concerned on the following conditions:-
(i) That the accused-applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by police authorities as and when required and will cooperate with the investigation.
(ii) That the accused-applicant shall not, directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat and 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.
(iii) That the accused-applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court.
The papers regarding bail submitted to the police officer on behalf of the accused-applicant shall form part of the case diary and would be submitted to the court concerned along with same at the time of submission of report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions or in case it is otherwise found for any other reason the bail is required to be canceled, it shall be open for the State or the appropriate authority to move application for cancellation of bail/vacation of this order in accordance with law.
Learned A.G.A. prays for and is granted ten days time to file counter affidavit.
List on 28.10.2021."
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant has falsely been implicated in this case. He was picked up by the police from his house. He has no criminal antecedents and he has not misused the liberty granted by this court. He has no criminal antecedents.The chargesheet has been filed in the matter. He undertakes to cooperate in the trial.
Learned AGA has opposed the prayer made by the applicant's counsel, however, he does not dispute the fact that the applicant has cooperated during investigation.
On due consideration to the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties as well as perusal of the record, so also the fact that the applicant has criminal antecedents, he has not misused the liberty granted by this Court, chargesheet has been filed and also considering the fact that the applicant has undertaken to cooperate in the trial, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case in the light of judgment of Supreme Court in Sushila Aggarwal and others vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and another (2020)5 SCC 1.
In view of the above as also keeping in view of the judgment in Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi) 2020 SCC OnLine 98, the interim order dated 06.10.2021 is affirmed. However, the accused-applicant Haseen Khan is directed to surrender before trial court if he is summoned to face trial for offence in question after filing of the charge sheet. The accused-applicant shall be released on bail by the trial court on the same bail bond(s) as executed by him consequent to the order passed by this Court, as extracted above, subject to his satisfaction, with the following conditions:
(i) 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 tamper with the evidence;
(ii) The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court;
(iii)The applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness;
(iv)The applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;
(v) In case of breach of any of the above conditions the court below shall have the liberty to cancel the bail;
Any other reasonable restrictions/conditions which the trial court may deem fit and proper can be imposed.
It is made clear that the observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.
It is further made clear that in case the accused-applicant has not been arrested during investigation, then he shall be released on bail as directed above, on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court.
In view of the aforesaid, the anticipatory bail application is allowed.
Order Date :- 12.1.2023
kkv/
