SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Saleem Qasim vs State Of U.P. on 30 September, 2019

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

Court No. – 51

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. – 40667 of 2019

Applicant :- Saleem Qasim

Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.

Counsel for Applicant :- Sadaful Islam Jafri,Nazrul Islam Jafri(Senior Adv.)

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon’ble Vipin Sinha,J.

Heard Sri Nazrul Islam Jafri(Senior Adv.), learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Mohd. Nadeem, learned AGA appearing for the State and perused the record.

The present anticipatory bail application has moved by the applicant seeking bail in Case Crime No.726 of 2019, under Section 406 IPC, Police Station Civil Lines, District Rampur.

I have perused the prosecution story as set up in the FIR and also the anticipatory bail rejection order.

The contention of the counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case; that the vehicle in question was attached to the office of the applicant; that an FIR was lodged with the contention that the vehicle was misused by the applicant for his personal purpose and thereafter surcharge was impose; that against the order of imposing surcharge an appeal has been field before the Cooperative Tribunal, Lucknow, in which an interim order has been passed, the relevant portion of the order is extracted herein below:-

^^ekeys ds lEiw.kZ rF;ksa] ifjfLFkfr;ksa dks n`f”Vxr j[krs gq;s ;g vknsf’kr fd;k tkrk gS fd fu;r frfFk rd vihykFkhZ ds fo:) dksbZ mRihM+d dk;Zokgh u dh tk;sA ;g ‘krZ j[kh tkrh gS fd ;fn vihykFkhZ dksbZ Hkh Lfkxu izkFkZuk i izLrqr djsxk rks ;g vkns’k rRdky lekIr dj fn;k tk;sxkA fu;r frfFk dks LVs izkFkZuk i dk fuLrkj.k xq.knks”k ds vk/kkj ij fd;k tk;sxkA

The further contention is that an appeal is pending before the Cooperative Tribunal, Lucknow and in the meantime an FIR has been lodged against the applicant; that the applicant has got no previous criminal history; that the matter needs deeper and fairer investigation before any arrest should be given effect to; that the applicant is willing to participate and cooperate with the investigation. Therefore the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on anticipatory bail.

The contention of the counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case; that the applicant was not named in the present FIR and his name cropped up in the confessional statement of one of the co-accused; that in a police firing case the applicant was arrested and thereafter, he has been implicated in the present case; that the applicant has got no previous criminal history; that the matter needs deeper and fairer investigation before any arrest should be given effect to; that the applicant is willing to participate and cooperate with the investigation. Therefore the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on anticipatory bail.

Learned AGA appearing for the State has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the applicant, but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the counsel for the applicant.

Keeping in view the reasons as stated above, the facts and circumstances of the case as have been discussed at the Bar of this Court, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, considering the nature of accusation, the applicant is entitled to be released on anticipatory bail in this case.

In the event of arrest of the applicant, Saleem Qasim, involved in the aforesaid case, 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 them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police office;

(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 :- 30.9.2019/VKG

 

 

Leave a Reply

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


Not found ...? HOW TO WIN 498a, DV, DIVORCE; Search in Above link

All Law documents and Judgment copies
Laws and Bare Acts of India
Landmark SC/HC Judgements
Rules and Regulations of India.

STUDY REPORTS

Copyright © 2021 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