Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Abdullah Umar vs The State Of Uttar Pradesh on 4 July, 2023
Bench: Aniruddha Bose, C.T. Ravikumar
1
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1737 OF 2023
(Arising out of SLP(Crl.) No. 3372/2023)
ABDULLAH UMAR Appellant(s)
VERSUS
THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH Respondent(s)
ORDER
Leave granted.
Heard Mr. Sanjay R Hegde, learned senior counsel for the appellant and Ms. Garima Prashad, learned Additional Advocate General for the State.
The appellant assails the legality of a judgment of the Allahabad High Court rejecting his plea for bail and the appellant, who was taken into custody on 7 th November 2021 has been charged with committing offences under Sections 417, 120-B, 153-A, 153-B, 295-A, 298, 121-A and 123 of the Indian Penal Code(‘IPC’) and Sections 3, 5 and 8 of the Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021(‘the 2021 Act’). The main allegation against the appellant is that he has received money from various sources outside the country and has utilized the Signature Not Verified said funds for illegal religious conversion. Needless to Digitally signed by SNEHA DAS Date: 2023.07.04 20:19:58 IST add, these allegations are disputed by Mr. Hegde. Reason: As regards legality of transactions arising out of remittance of said funds to the bank accounts of the 2 appellant is concerned, Ms. Prasad has submitted that investigation under the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act, 2010 is under way.
So far as the allegations against him for commission of offences under the IPC and the 2021 Act, we were apprised by Ms. Prasad that charges have been framed. Mr. Hegde’s argument is that in such circumstances, there can be no reason for continuing with the detention of the appellant pending trial.
Ms. Prashad, however, emphasized on the fact that investigation about the persons from whom he received the funds and how these funds were disbursed is an ongoing process and, on that count, she resists the plea for bail. Her further submission is that in case the appellant is enlarged on bail, he might influence the witnesses/victims. As we have already indicated, the appellant was taken into custody on 7th November 2021 on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged on 20th June, 2021. The materials disclosed before us reveal that implication of the appellant at this stage primarily relates to alleged offence of illegal conversion, though there are other allegations against him as well. This being the position, and having regard to the fact that charges have been framed, we do not think that the appellant is required to be kept in detention pending trial, and the appellant ought to be enlarged on bail. Hence, we set aside the impugned order. 3
Let the appellant be released on bail on such terms the NIA Court may deem fit and proper, in addition to the conditions we enumerate in the succeeding paragraphs. We are imposing these conditions to address the apprehension of the State, which was articulated before us by Ms. Prashad.
We, accordingly, direct that the appellant shall be subjected to the following conditions by the NIA Court in addition to those that may be imposed by the NIA Court:-
(i) He shall not leave the National Capital Territory of Delhi without obtaining permission from the Special Court, NIA at Lucknow.
(ii) While being enlarged on bail, he shall keep his mobile phone functional 24 hours a day. He shall share his mobile phone number with the Investigating Officer and his live location shall also be kept on round the clock and paired with the mobile phone of the Investigating Officer. For this reason, the Investigating Officer shall also make available to the appellant his mobile phone number.
(iii) He shall not use any mobile phone apart from the one, the number of which would be shared with the Investigating Officer.
(iv) The appellant shall not communicate or try to communicate with any of the witnesses or alleged victims or try to influence them otherwise. 4
(v) The appellant shall not leave the Country without permission of the Trial Court and if he has any passport, he shall surrender the same to the Investigating Officer.
(vi) He shall not enter the State of Uttar Pradesh for any reason whatsoever except for attending trial or for meeting any officer of the investigating agency, if required to do so. He shall, however, also attend the office of the Investigating Agency, ATS, Noida, once every three days and report to the officer there, whose name and designation shall be made available to the appellant by the Investigating Officer.
(vii) He shall otherwise cooperate with the investigating agency.
We, also, make it clear that in the event the appellant cannot furnish any local surety, the concerned Court shall accept as sureties persons residing outside the State of U.P. to the satisfaction of the said Court. The present appeal stands allowed in the above terms. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.
………………………………………………………………..J. [ANIRUDDHA BOSE] ………………………………………………………………..J. [C.T. RAVIKUMAR] NEW DELHI;
JULY 04, 2023.
5
ITEM NO.6 COURT NO.6 SECTION II
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No. 3372/2023 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 16-12-2022 in CRLA No. 1739/2022 passed by the High Court Of Judicature At Allahabad, Lucknow Bench) ABDULLAH UMAR Petitioner(s) VERSUS THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH Respondent(s) (FOR ADMISSION and IA No.52482/2023-EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. IA No. 52482/2023 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. IA No. 59600/2023 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES) Date : 04-07-2023 This matter was called on for hearing today. CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIRUDDHA BOSE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.T. RAVIKUMAR For Petitioner(s) Mr. Sanjay R Hegde, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Pranjal Kishore, AOR For Respondent(s) Mrs. Garima Prashad Sr., A.A.G. Mr. Adarsh Upadhyay, AOR Mr. Divyanshu Sahay, Adv.
Mr. Aman Pathak, Adv.
Ms. Pallavi Kumari, Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Leave granted.
The impugned order is set aside; the appellant be released on bail and the present appeal stands allowed in terms of the signed order which is placed on 6 the file.
Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.
(SNEHA DAS) (VIDYA NEGI) SENIOR PERSONAL ASSISTANT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR