Allahabad High Court
Adil Khan vs State Of U.P. on 29 August, 2022
Author: Raj Beer Singh
Bench: Raj Beer Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 72 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 7400 of 2022 Applicant :- Adil Khan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Shams Uz Zaman,Mohd Adil Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
The present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime no. 280 of 2021, under Section 420 I.P.C. and Section 66-C of I.T. Act, Police Station Bahjoi, District Sambhal with the prayer that in the event of arrest, applicant may be released on bail.
According to prosecution version, the Facebook I.D. "Pro Cell Sambhal" pertains to district Sambhal and it is being used by Media Cell for Government works. On 10.06.2021 police came to know that one unknown person has made a fake and duplicate account by the name of "Pro Cell Sambhal" and he is demanding and extorting money from public persons. During investigation, involvement of applicant was found in the alleged incident.
It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and he has an apprehension that he may be arrested in the above-mentioned case, whereas there is no credible evidence against him and that no coercive process has been issued against the applicant so far. Applicant is not named in the FIR and he has been falsely implicated in this case during investigation without there being any evidence against him. Police have not traced the original culprits. It was submitted that during investigation, police have found that SIM card of the applicant's uncle was used and the police have called the uncle of applicant and falsely implicated in a case under Arms Act and that when applicant and his family members went to the police station in favour of uncle of applicant, some hot talk has taken place and thereafter applicant was falsely implicated in this case. It was further submitted that police have demanded an amount of Rs. 50,000/- from the applicant and as he was unable to provide the same, he was falsely implicated in this case. Prosecution version is not supported by any independent witness. It was submitted that applicant has no knowledge about the incident and that the allegations made in the FIR are thoroughly false. Applicant has no criminal antecedents. The applicant undertakes to co-operate during investigation and trial and he would appear as and when required by the investigating agency or Court. It has been stated that in case, the applicant is granted anticipatory bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and will co-operate with the investigation and would obey all conditions of bail.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the application for anticipatory bail and argued that the present application for anticipatory bail is not supported by the affidavit of applicant. It was submitted that during investigation, involvement of applicant was found in the incident. In the alleged incident, a duplicate facebook account by the name of "Pro Cell Sambhal" was made, whereas the actual account of "Pro Cell Sambhal" was being used for government works and that by the said fake account demand of money was made from several public persons. It was further submitted that in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the custodial interrogation of the applicant would be required.
It may be stated that in case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra, (2011) 1 SCC 694, it has been held by Hon'ble Supreme Court that while deciding anticipatory bail, Court must consider nature and gravity of accusation, antecedent of accused, possibility of accused to flee from justice and that Court must evaluate entire available material against the accused carefully and that the exact role of the accused has also to be taken into consideration.
In the instant case, considering the settled principle of law regarding anticipatory bail, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, nature of accusation, role of applicant and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on merit of the case, no case for anticipatory bail is made out. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application filed on behalf of the applicant Adil Khan is rejected.
Order Date :- 29.8.2022 Anand