Allahabad High Court
Sadab And Another vs State Of U.P.And Another on 5 May, 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. - 5063 of 2023
Applicant :- Sadab And Another
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.And Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Ajay Kumar Mishra
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.
1. List has been revised.
2. Heard Sri Ajay Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicants, Jamaluddin Mohd. Nasir, learned counsel for the informant and Sri Rohit Dubey, 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.116 of 2023, registered under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 452, 323, 345, 506, 354 and 34 IPC at Police Station- Lisadi Gate, District Meerut with a prayer to enlarge them on anticipatory bail.
4. As per prosecution story, the applicants and co-accused person Shadab and twelve unknown persons are stated to have forged the documents and are stated to have sold the said property to other person and subsequent to it on 15.10.2020, the applicants and other persons are stated to have barged into their house and beaten them up. The police was informed by dialing 112 but no action was taken. There was CCTV footage of the said act of the applicants, as such the FIR was instituted against the applicants and other co-accused persons on 28.02.2023.
5. Learned counsel for the applicants has stated that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the present case. The FIR itself is delayed by about four months and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. Learned counsel has further stated that there is a civil suit pending filed by the same informant and other persons filed on 27.05.2022. The said civil case has been given criminal colour. 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 applicants. 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.
6. Per contra, learned counsel for the informant and 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.
7. 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.
8. In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicants is allowed. Let the accused-applicants- Sadab and Shahvez @ Mohammad Shahvez Ansari 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.
9. 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 :- 5.5.2023
Ravi Kant
