Allahabad High Court
Anees Fatma And 3 Others vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others on 21 September, 2023
Bench: Krishan Pahal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:183327
Court No. - 72
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 788 of 2023
Applicant :- Anees Fatma And 3 Others
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
Counsel for Applicant :- Prateek Sinha,Anil Kumar,Yashpal Yadav
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Syed Ali Imam
Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.
1. List has been revised.
2. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Syed Ali Imam, learned counsel for the informant and Sri R.P. Patel, 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 Criminal Case No.964 of 2017 (State vs. Nafees Fatma and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 1043 of 2016, registered under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C. at Police Station- Kotwali, District- Jaunpur with a prayer to enlarge them on anticipatory bail.
4. As per prosecution story, the husband of the co-accused person Nafees Fatma was put to death by her in collusion with the applicants, whereby, they had even cremated his body, but after a period of about eight months the said dead body was exhumed and it was found that he was administered some poisonous material, as such, his body was found in fit condition after a long period of eight months. The applicants, who happen to be in-laws of the deceased person and family members of main accused person Nafees Fatma, are stated to have forged the death certificate of the deceased person and got the property transferred in their favour.
5. Learned counsel for the applicants has stated that the applicants have been falsely implicated in this case. The applicants are in-laws of the deceased person and they are not the beneficiaries of the said property transferred. The applicants have simply been made an accused being the family members of the wife of the deceased person. Learned counsel has stated that the criminal history of one case assigned to applicant no.2, Faraz @ Shabi stands explained as he has been enlarged on bail in the said case of the murder of his brother-in-law. The other applicants have no criminal history to their credit.
6. 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. The applicants have apprehension of their arrest. Learned counsel has stated that the applicants undertake 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.
7. Per contra, learned counsel for the informant as well as learned A.G.A. have vehemently opposed the anticipatory bail application on the ground that the applicant no.2 has criminal history to his credit.
8. 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.
9. In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicants is allowed. Let the accused-applicants- Anees Fatma, Faraz @ Shabi, Seraj @ Mohd. Raza Abbas and Mahtab Ali 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.
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 :- 21.9.2023
Vikas
[Krishan Pahal, J.]
