High Court

In compliance of the order dated 2.1.2025, the Investigating Officer, Shri Shailesh Pratap Singh is present before this Court. On query being asked with respect to the conclusion of the investigation, he submits that he has recently joined and he will complete the investigation within a period of 30 days. Personal appearance of the Investigating Officer present is hereby exempted. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. The present bail application under Section 438 Cr.PC. has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in case crime No. 156 of 2023, under Sections 420,467,468,471,120B I.P.C., P.S.- Kaiserbagh, District- Lucknow. From perusal of the order sheet, it appears that on 30.1.2024, following order was passed wherein the present applicant has been granted interim anticipatory bail:- " 1. Heard Shri Arun Sinha, learned counsel for the applicant as well as Shri Rajesh Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

2. The present anticipatory bail application has been moved by the accused/applicant- Siraj Iqbal in Case Crime No. 156 of 2023, under Sections 420,467,468,471,120B I.P.C, Police Station Kaiserbagh, District Lucknow, with the prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail as he is apprehending arrest in the above-mentioned case.

3. Learned counsel for the accused-applicant while pressing the bail application submits that it is a case of false implication. The First Information Report in this case has been lodged by the LDA primary with allegation that the construction has been made by the Company incorporated by the co-accused persons in sheer violation of the approved map and the flats which have been constructed illegally have also been sold to bonafide purchaser and in this regard it is not only the regulations and by laws and approved map has been violated but the bonafide/ innocent purchasers have also been defrauded.

4. It is submitted that the applicant has never been a director or any office bearer of the construction company against whom the allegation of construction of flats in violation of approved map has been levelled.

5. In this regard, learned counsel for the applicant has drawn attention of this Court towards the details of office bearers of the Company placed at page no. 32 of the paper book, wherein the name of the instant applicant is not emerging as officer bearer of the Company.

6. It is further submitted that the applicant is aged about 65 years. He is suffering from cancer and has been operated twice for the disease and even if the case of the prosecution is taken on its face, having regard to the complete mechanism and scheme as provided under the U.P. Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973, the lodging of FIR and consequential investigation is without any authority and has been initiated only for the purpose of harassing the applicant and other co-accused persons.

7. It is vehemently submitted that the case of the applicant is on better footing than Mohsin Iqbal who has been granted regular bail by this Court vide order dated 18.1.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 15116 of 2023 and he was also a director of the Company, while the applicant is not having any relation with the construction company against which the allegations have been levelled.

8. It is further submitted that the applicant is ready to cooperate in the investigation and would remain present before the investigating officer as and when required.

9. Various other submissions have been raised by learned counsel for the applicant in order to show that the allottees of the flats are not having any grievance against the applicant as none of them have lodged any FIR against the construction company or any of its directors and the instant FIR has been lodged by Imtiyaz Ahmad, Junior Engineer, Lucknow Development Authority and in this FIR, the allegations have been levelled against Mohsin Iqbal and Siraj Iqbal pertaining to selling of flats without approved map.

10. Learned A.G.A. on the other hand submits that applicant had earlier approached this Court by filing a writ petition No. 9248 of 2023 with various prayers including the quashing of FIR with consequential prayer pertaining to stay on the arrest of the applicant and the said writ petition has been dismissed by the Division Bench of this Court on 6.12.2023.

11. Learned AGA has drawn attention of this Court towards the para nos. 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10 of the judgement and order dated 6.12.2023 in order to show that the applicant is not having any good ground on the basis of which protection from arrest may be granted to him. It is also submitted that the applicant at the relevant point of time was posted in Lucknow Development Authority on deputation basis and he in connivance with the rest of the co-accused persons helped them in procuring the approved plan.

12. In rebuttal, Shri Arun Sinha, learned counsel for the applicant submits that various flat owners had approached this Court by filing writ petition No. 387 of 2024 and a coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 12.1.2024 has stayed the operation of the orders of demolition issued by the prescribed authority Lucknow Development Authority and the complete mechanism with regard to the construction in violation of approved plan has been given in U.P. Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973 and there is no scope for launching criminal prosecution against the applicant.

13. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record, it is reflected that the FIR of the instant case has been lodged by the Junior Engineer of the Lucknow Development Authority and the grievance is with regard to the fact that the construction company, wherein the brothers of the applicant and other co-accused persons are directors and office bearers had raised certain constructions in violation of the plan approved by the Lucknow Development Authority. It is submitted that the irregularities in construction of the flats have been compounded by the Lucknow Development Authority and no flat owner is aggrieved by the sale of the flats and also that the flat owners have approached this Court by filing various writ petitions, wherein the stay has been granted by a coordinate Bench of this Court. It is also submitted that the co-accused Mohsin Iqbal, who was also an office bearer of the construction company, has been granted regular bail by this Court. It is vehemently submitted on behalf of the applicant that the applicant is not associated with the construction company in any way. So far as the dismissal of writ petition filed by the applicant is concerned, suffice is to observe that the said petition was for quashing of the F.I.R., while the applicant is before this Court for protection of his liberty. Thus the observation of the Division Bench in order dated 12.1.2024 may not be read adverse to the applicant in this case. After all there is difference in quashing of an F.I.R. and protection of liberty of a person, who is also having presumption of innocence.

14. Thus, having regard to all the facts and circumstances of the case while granting an opportunity of filing counter affidavit to the State, interim protection from arrest may be granted to the applicant.

15. List this case on 12.02.2024 in the first twenty cases of the cause list, by which date the State may file counter affidavit/objections.

17. It is provided that till the next date of listing in the event of arrest of the applicant- Siraj Iqbal involved in the above noted case, he shall be released on anticipatory bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the Police Station concerned/ Investigating Officer/ arresting officer subject to the following conditions: (1) The applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; (2) 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; (3) The applicant shall not leave the country without the previous permission of the Court." Learned counsel for the applicant has specifically stated that there is no complaint that the applicant is not cooperating in the investigation proceedings. State counsel has failed to demonstrate from the counter affidavit that there is any adversarial fact which are pleaded in the bail application. This Court finds that the applicant was enlarged on anticipatory bail after thorough considering the merits of the case. It has also not been pleaded by counsel for the State that the present applicant is not cooperating with the trial proceedings. In view of the aforesaid, the present anticipatory bail application is hereby disposed of while extending anticipatory bail to the applicant namely, Siraj Iqbal, till disposal of the trial subject to the following conditions:- (i) that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; (ii) that 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 or tamper with the evidence; (iii) that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court; (iv) that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted; and (v) that the applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness. In case of default, it would be open for the investigating agency to move application for vacation of this order. Order Date :- 21.1.2025 Shravan

In compliance of the order dated 2.1.2025, the Investigating Officer, Shri Shailesh Pratap Singh is present before this Court. On query being asked with respect to the conclusion of the investigation, he submits that he has recently joined and he will complete the investigation within a period of 30 days. Personal appearance of the Investigating Officer present is hereby exempted. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. The present bail application under Section 438 Cr.PC. has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in case crime No. 156 of 2023, under Sections 420,467,468,471,120B I.P.C., P.S.- Kaiserbagh, District- Lucknow. From perusal of the order sheet, it appears that on 30.1.2024, following order was passed wherein the present applicant has been granted interim anticipatory bail:- " 1. Heard Shri Arun Sinha, learned counsel for the applicant as well as Shri Rajesh Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

2. The present anticipatory bail application has been moved by the accused/applicant- Siraj Iqbal in Case Crime No. 156 of 2023, under Sections 420,467,468,471,120B I.P.C, Police Station Kaiserbagh, District Lucknow, with the prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail as he is apprehending arrest in the above-mentioned case.

3. Learned counsel for the accused-applicant while pressing the bail application submits that it is a case of false implication. The First Information Report in this case has been lodged by the LDA primary with allegation that the construction has been made by the Company incorporated by the co-accused persons in sheer violation of the approved map and the flats which have been constructed illegally have also been sold to bonafide purchaser and in this regard it is not only the regulations and by laws and approved map has been violated but the bonafide/ innocent purchasers have also been defrauded.

4. It is submitted that the applicant has never been a director or any office bearer of the construction company against whom the allegation of construction of flats in violation of approved map has been levelled.

5. In this regard, learned counsel for the applicant has drawn attention of this Court towards the details of office bearers of the Company placed at page no. 32 of the paper book, wherein the name of the instant applicant is not emerging as officer bearer of the Company.

6. It is further submitted that the applicant is aged about 65 years. He is suffering from cancer and has been operated twice for the disease and even if the case of the prosecution is taken on its face, having regard to the complete mechanism and scheme as provided under the U.P. Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973, the lodging of FIR and consequential investigation is without any authority and has been initiated only for the purpose of harassing the applicant and other co-accused persons.

7. It is vehemently submitted that the case of the applicant is on better footing than Mohsin Iqbal who has been granted regular bail by this Court vide order dated 18.1.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 15116 of 2023 and he was also a director of the Company, while the applicant is not having any relation with the construction company against which the allegations have been levelled.

8. It is further submitted that the applicant is ready to cooperate in the investigation and would remain present before the investigating officer as and when required.

9. Various other submissions have been raised by learned counsel for the applicant in order to show that the allottees of the flats are not having any grievance against the applicant as none of them have lodged any FIR against the construction company or any of its directors and the instant FIR has been lodged by Imtiyaz Ahmad, Junior Engineer, Lucknow Development Authority and in this FIR, the allegations have been levelled against Mohsin Iqbal and Siraj Iqbal pertaining to selling of flats without approved map.

10. Learned A.G.A. on the other hand submits that applicant had earlier approached this Court by filing a writ petition No. 9248 of 2023 with various prayers including the quashing of FIR with consequential prayer pertaining to stay on the arrest of the applicant and the said writ petition has been dismissed by the Division Bench of this Court on 6.12.2023.

11. Learned AGA has drawn attention of this Court towards the para nos. 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10 of the judgement and order dated 6.12.2023 in order to show that the applicant is not having any good ground on the basis of which protection from arrest may be granted to him. It is also submitted that the applicant at the relevant point of time was posted in Lucknow Development Authority on deputation basis and he in connivance with the rest of the co-accused persons helped them in procuring the approved plan.

12. In rebuttal, Shri Arun Sinha, learned counsel for the applicant submits that various flat owners had approached this Court by filing writ petition No. 387 of 2024 and a coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 12.1.2024 has stayed the operation of the orders of demolition issued by the prescribed authority Lucknow Development Authority and the complete mechanism with regard to the construction in violation of approved plan has been given in U.P. Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973 and there is no scope for launching criminal prosecution against the applicant.

13. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record, it is reflected that the FIR of the instant case has been lodged by the Junior Engineer of the Lucknow Development Authority and the grievance is with regard to the fact that the construction company, wherein the brothers of the applicant and other co-accused persons are directors and office bearers had raised certain constructions in violation of the plan approved by the Lucknow Development Authority. It is submitted that the irregularities in construction of the flats have been compounded by the Lucknow Development Authority and no flat owner is aggrieved by the sale of the flats and also that the flat owners have approached this Court by filing various writ petitions, wherein the stay has been granted by a coordinate Bench of this Court. It is also submitted that the co-accused Mohsin Iqbal, who was also an office bearer of the construction company, has been granted regular bail by this Court. It is vehemently submitted on behalf of the applicant that the applicant is not associated with the construction company in any way. So far as the dismissal of writ petition filed by the applicant is concerned, suffice is to observe that the said petition was for quashing of the F.I.R., while the applicant is before this Court for protection of his liberty. Thus the observation of the Division Bench in order dated 12.1.2024 may not be read adverse to the applicant in this case. After all there is difference in quashing of an F.I.R. and protection of liberty of a person, who is also having presumption of innocence.

14. Thus, having regard to all the facts and circumstances of the case while granting an opportunity of filing counter affidavit to the State, interim protection from arrest may be granted to the applicant.

15. List this case on 12.02.2024 in the first twenty cases of the cause list, by which date the State may file counter affidavit/objections.

17. It is provided that till the next date of listing in the event of arrest of the applicant- Siraj Iqbal involved in the above noted case, he shall be released on anticipatory bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the Police Station concerned/ Investigating Officer/ arresting officer subject to the following conditions: (1) The applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; (2) 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; (3) The applicant shall not leave the country without the previous permission of the Court." Learned counsel for the applicant has specifically stated that there is no complaint that the applicant is not cooperating in the investigation proceedings. State counsel has failed to demonstrate from the counter affidavit that there is any adversarial fact which are pleaded in the bail application. This Court finds that the applicant was enlarged on anticipatory bail after thorough considering the merits of the case. It has also not been pleaded by counsel for the State that the present applicant is not cooperating with the trial proceedings. In view of the aforesaid, the present anticipatory bail application is hereby disposed of while extending anticipatory bail to the applicant namely, Siraj Iqbal, till disposal of the trial subject to the following conditions:- (i) that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; (ii) that 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 or tamper with the evidence; (iii) that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court; (iv) that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted; and (v) that the applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness. In case of default, it would be open for the investigating agency to move application for vacation of this order. Order Date :- 21.1.2025 Shravan