SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Moh. Maruf vs State Of U.P. on 1 October, 2019

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

?Court No. – 51

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. – 41489 of 2019

Applicant :- Moh. Maruf

Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.

Counsel for Applicant :- Atul Kumar

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon’ble Vipin Sinha,J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Rahul Singh Tomar, Advocate holding brief of Sri P.S. Pundir, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. appearing for the State and perused the record.

It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further contended that applicant is the father-in-law of the victim and the allegation made in the FIR is highly improbable; there is a matrimonial dispute between the husband and wife and on account of this entire family members have been implicated. It is next contended that husband and mother-in-law have been granted bail, copy of bail order is annexed at page 47 of the bail application. The matter needs deeper and fairer investigation before any arrest should be given effect to. Therefore, the applicant may be enlarged on anticipatory bail.

Learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail.

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, considering the nature of accusation and the fact that he has no criminal antecedents, the applicant is entitled to be released on anticipatory bail in this case.

In the event of arrest of the applicant, Moh. Maruf involved in Case Crime No. 76 of 2019 under Section 498A, Section323, Section504, Section376 I.P.C. and 3/4 SectionDowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Mahila Thana, District Muzaffar Nagar, he shall be released on anticipatory bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the police station concerned with the following conditions:-

(i) the applicant will join and participate in each and every aspect of “Investigation” and will lend full assistance to the Investigating Agency even with regard to “discovery of fact” if and when required so by the Investigating Agency or the concerned court;

(ii) the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

iii) 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;

(iv) the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court and if he has passport the same shall be deposited by him before the S.S.P./S.P. Concerned.

In default or misuse of any of the conditions, the Public Prosecutor/Investigating Officer/first informant-complainant is at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant.

Order Date :- 1.10.2019

Ujjawal

 

 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Copyright © 2020 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation
×

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation