Allahabad High Court
Smt Huda Fatima vs State Of U.P. on 7 May, 2024
Author: Krishan Pahal
Bench: Krishan Pahal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:81341
Court No. - 76
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 4547 of 2024
Applicant :- Smt Huda Fatima
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Ramesh Kumar Sahu,Sunil Vashisth
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.
1. List has been revised.
2. Heard Sri Sunil Vashisth, learned counsel for the applicant 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.0048 of 2023 registered under Sections 406, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC at Police Station- Collectorganj, District Kanpur Nagar with a prayer to enlarge her on anticipatory bail.
4. As per prosecution story, the co-accused persons, namely, Nadeem Kamar and Mohd. Tausif Khan, are stated to have duped the informant by retaining the amount for the goods worth Rs.39,63,102/-. The co-accused person Mohd. Tausif Khan is stated to be the husband of the applicant.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. The allegations against the applicant are that she happens to be the proprietor of one of the three firms mentioned in the FIR. Learned counsel has further stated that she is a home maker and has nothing to do with the said offence. The main accused persons are her husband Mohd. Tausif Khan and Nadeem Kamar. Mohd. Tausif Khan was arrested and has been enlarged on regular bail.
6. Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicant to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against her. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicant have also been touched upon at length. In all, three FIRs of similar nature regarding the same transactions have been instituted against all the co-accused persons including the applicant. There is no previous criminal history of the applicant except the said three FIRs. The applicant has apprehension of her arrest. Learned counsel for the applicant undertakes that she 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. The case of the applicant is at a different footing to the main accused persons, namely, Nadeem Kamar and Mohd. Tausif Khan.
9. 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 Supreme Court.
10. In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed. Let the accused-applicant-Smt. Huda Fatima 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 applicant shall make herself 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 her 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.
11. 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 :- 7.5.2024
Shalini
(Justice Krishan Pahal)
