Allahabad High Court
Iqbal Ahmad vs State Of U.P. 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. - 3247 of 2023
Applicant :- Iqbal Ahmad
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Aditya Bhushan Singhal
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.
1. List has been revised.
2. Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record.
3. Heard Sri Aditya Bhushan Singhal, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Ram Mohit Yadav, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record.
4. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Complaint Case No.15419 of 2022 (Smt. Perveen vs. Iqbal & Others), registered under Sections 323, 354, 452, 447, 448 I.P.C. at Police Station Sipari Bazar, District Jhansi with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.
5. As per prosecution story, the applicant alongwith other co-accused persons are said to have barged into the house of the complainant on 7.9.2021 at about 09:30 a.m. and are stated to have ransacked the house and beaten her up causing injuries.
6. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that he has been falsely implicated in this case. The application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. moved by the complainant on 27.9.2021 is itself delayed by about twenty days. Learned counsel has stated that the present complaint case is counterblast to an application moved by the applicant on the IGRS portal on 10.9.2021. The applicant and one another co-accused person have been summoned by the court concerned vide order dated 19.12.2022. There is no other criminal history of the applicant except another FIR instituted by the son of the complainant herein. Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicant to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against him. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicant have also been touched upon at length. The applicant has apprehension of his arrest. Learned counsel for the applicant undertakes that he has co-operated in the investigation and is 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 applicant.
8. On due consideration to the arguments advanced 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 is 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 applicant 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 applicant is allowed. Let the accused-applicant- Iqbal Ahmad be released forthwith in the aforesaid complaint case (supra) on anticipatory bail till the conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-
(i). that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;
(ii). that 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 to any police officer or tamper with the evidence;
(iii). that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court;
(iv). that in case charge-sheet is submitted the applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial;
(v). that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;
(vi). that the applicant 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.
[Krishan Pahal, J.]
Order Date :- 5.5.2023
Vikas
