Allahabad High Court
Mahboob vs State Of U.P. And Another on 3 October, 2023
Bench: Krishan Pahal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:189108
Court No. - 72
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 9820 of 2023
Applicant :- Mahboob
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Naseem Ahmad,Syeda Alia Khatoon
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Vishnu Kumar
Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.
1. List has been revised.
2. Heard Sri Salman Ahmad, Advocate holding brief of Sri Naseem Ahmad, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Vishnu Kumar, learned counsel for the informant and Sri V.K.S. Parmar, 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 applicant in Case Crime No.104 of 2021, registered under Sections 420, 406, 504, 506 I.P.C. at Police Station- Civil Lines, District- Rampur with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.
4. As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have taken an amount of Rs.20 lakhs, in three transactions on 25.1.2029, 25.12.2019 and 4.1.2020, from the informant on the pretext that he shall be granted job in the Khadi Gramodyog Department. The applicant is stated to have given a fake appointment letter to him.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. He has nothing to do with the said offence. The applicant is simply a seed seller and is not an employee in the said department. Learned counsel has stated that the applicant and the informant had other transactions to deal with, as such, the applicant had even given Rs.1 lakh to the informant. The applicant had filed the petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. in this case, which is pending. The applicant was granted protection in the said petition but in the light of judgment of the Apex Court in Asian Resurfacing of Road Agency Private Limited and Another vs. Central Bureau of Investigation, (2018) 16 SCC 299 the said stay order stood vacated.
6. Learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that the applicant has no criminal history to his credit. 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 has stated that 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 counsel for the informant as well as learned A.G.A. have vehemently opposed the anticipatory bail application and stated that it is but evident that applicant has committed the said offence from the fact that he has returned the amount of Rs.1 lakh to the informant.
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- Mahboob be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime (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 concerned 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.
Order Date :- 3.10.2023
Vikas
[Krishan Pahal, J.]
