Allahabad High Court
Mohd. Umar Khan @ Umar Khan vs State Of U.P. And Anr. on 25 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. - 6600 of 2021
Applicant :- Mohd. Umar Khan @ Umar Khan
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Anr.
Counsel for Applicant :- Mohd. Tabrez Iqbal,Yahya Ali
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.
The applicant has moved the present application under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. praying for grant of anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 238 of 2019 under sections 406, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C. and 12 of Passport Act, P.S. Aliganj, district Lucknow.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.
It is submitted on behalf of the applicant that as prosecution case, the informant had given money to the accused persons who have promised to return it back. As a security, they have also given their cheque, original passport and stamp papers. It is further alleged that the accused persons have done forgery with others and have taken money from other persons in lieu of providing air tickets. In some of the cases, police complaint and court cases have been filed. It is lastly alleged that by making forged I.D. and showing themselves to be a resident of Ludhiana, they have got issued new passport at Ludhiana address by showing that their earlier passport has been stolen.
It is submitted on behalf of the applicant that the applicant, though has changed his present address after reporting its earlier address and after due verification under Passport Act, new passport has been issued. The applicant is entitled to change his address.
It is next submitted that the prosecution under section 12 of the Passport Act in the case crime registered on the basis of first information report is barred under Section 15 of the Passport Act. It is submitted that the applicant shall cooperate in the investigation/trial.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer made by the applicant's counsel.
Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusation and the undertaking given on behalf of the applicant that he shall cooperate in the investigation/trial and gravity of offence, 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, subject to his cooperation in the investigation/trial.
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, in the event of arrest, the accused applicant is directed to be released on bail by the investigating officer/trial court on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the investigating officer/ trial Court, 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.
In view of the aforesaid, the anticipatory bail application is allowed.
Order Date :- 25.1.2023
kkb/
