Allahabad High Court
Arshad Rasheed Khan vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. ... on 1 March, 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. - 562 of 2023
Applicant :- Arshad Rasheed Khan
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home
Counsel for Applicant :- Mohemmed Amir Naqvi,Amjad Siddiqui
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.0267 of 2016 under sections 420, 409, 120-B I.P.C. and section 13(1) c and d read with 13(2) P.C. Act, P.S. Kotwali, district Kanpur Nagar.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.
It is alleged in the first information report that the appellant Arshad Rasheed Khan in collusion with one Mrs. Ibranoor by misusing his power and position has passed order deregistering the Waqf property, thereby causing financial loss to waqf. It is further alleged that an application was moved by Mrs. Ibranoor for deregistering house No.13/387 on waqf property No.70, however, the applicant deregistered the same along with two other properties, i.e. 13/388 and 13/389. He is also alleged to have collided in misplacement of the record of property in question.
It is submitted behalf of the applicant that although the applicant has passed order dated 26.8.2000 in his capacity as Member of Waqf Board, however, that order on an application received by the applicant has been recalled by him. The recall order is filed as Anenxure No.6 to the application. The offence is alleged to have taken place in the year 2000. The first information report has been lodged after delay of 16 years, i.e. in the year 2016. It is submitted that no loss of property is caused to the Waqf Board. Even otherwise, the dispute is of civil nature. The first information report has been lodged to malign the reputation of the applicant after a long period.
It is next submitted that the co-accused Abdul Wahid has been enlarged on anticipatory bail vide order dated 21.4.2022 passed by a coordinate Bench of this court in anticipatory bail No.159 of 2022.
He further submits that the applicant has cooperated in the investigation. Charge sheet has been filed. He undertakes on behalf of the applicant that the applicant shall cooperate in the 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, prima facie there appears to be no loss of property to the Waqf Board, the age of the applicant who is 66 years old, the applicant having no criminal antecedents, the undertaking given on behalf of the applicant that he shall cooperate in the trial and gravity of offence, I am of the opinion that in the event of arrest/surrender before the concerned court, the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on anticipatory 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 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, the accused applicant is directed to surrender before trial court if he is summoned to face trial for offence in question after filing of the charge sheet. In the event of arrest/surrender before the concerned court, the accused applicant shall be enlarged on anticipatory bail by the trial court on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the 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 :- 1.3.2023
kkb/
