Allahabad High Court
Mohd. Saifi vs State Of U.P. And Another on 31 July, 2023
Author: Krishan Pahal
Bench: Krishan Pahal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:152784 Court No. - 72 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 10734 of 2022 Applicant :- Mohd. Saifi Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Zia Uddin Ahmad,Kamal Krishna Roy,Mohd. Saeed Siddiqui,Mumtaj Ansari,Prabha Shanker Mishra,Rajvendra Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.
1. Heard Mohd. Saeed Siddiqui, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri R.P. Patel, learned AGA for the State and also perused the material available on records.
2. The applicant is seeking anticipatory bail in connection with Case Crime No. 118 of 2022, under Sections 143, 144, 145, 147, 148, 149, 153-A, 153-B, 295-A, 201, 511, 307, 332, 333, 353, 395, 435, 436, 427, 504, 505(2), 506 & 120-B of IPC, Sections 4/5 of Explosive Substances Act, Section 7 of Criminal Law Amendment Act, Section 83 of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection) Act and Sections 3/4 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, Police Station- Khuldabad, District- Prayagraj.
3. At the very outset, learned counsel for the applicants have claimed parity with the co-accused Umar Khalid, who has already been granted anticipatory bail by another Bench of this Court in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application u/s 438 Cr.P.C. No.6536 of 2022 vide order dated 16.02.2023. Since the case of the applicant is at par with the co-accused who has already been granted anticipatory bail till the submission of police report, the applicant is also entitled for the same on the ground of parity. Learned counsel has also stated that there is no other criminal history of the applicant except a case instituted regarding violation of restrictions imposed during Covid-19 pandemic.
4. The prayer for anticipatory bail has been vehemently opposed by learned AGA. However, the aforesaid factual aspect of the parity to the co-accused has not been disputed by him.
5. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the opinion that the applicant deserves to be granted anticipatory bail in connection with the aforesaid case.
6. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application is allowed with following directions:-
(A) In the event of arrest of the applicant involved in aforesaid case shall be released on anticipatory bail till the submission of police report, if any, under section 173(2) Cr.P.C. before the competent Court on his/her furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the police station concerned;
(B) The applicant shall co-operate with the Investigating Officer during investigation and shall report to the Investigating Officer as and when required for the purpose of conducting investigation;
(C) 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 officer; and (D) The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court.
7. 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.
(Justice Krishan Pahal) Order Date :- 31.7.2023 Siddhant