High Court

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, Mr. Akash Singh, Advocate holding brief of Shri Romit Seth, learned counsel for the complainant, 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. 307 of 2022, under Sections 420,467,468,471 I.P.C., P.S.- Kotwali, District- Sitapur. From perusal of the order sheet, it appears that on 15.5.2024, following order was passed wherein the present applicants have been granted interim anticipatory bail:- " 1. Heard Shri M. E. Khan, learned counsel for the applicants as well as learned A.G.A. for the State, Shri Romit Seth, learned counsel appearing for the informant/complainant and perused the record.

2. The present anticipatory bail application has been moved by the accused/applicants- Mohammad Haneef, Mehndi Hasan (as per F.I.R. Mehndi), Israrul Hasan, Fakhrul Hasan, Mohammad Fareed, Mohammad Saif Ansari, Mohammad Faiz Ansari and Saeedunnisha in Case Crime No.307 of 2022, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C, Police Station Kotwali, District Sitapur, with the prayer to enlarge them on anticipatory bail as they are apprehending arrest in the above-mentioned case.

3. Learned counsel for the accused-applicants while pressing the anticipatory bail application submits that the applicants have been falsely implicated in this case and they have not committed any offence as claimed by the prosecution.

4. While drawing attention of this Court towards many documents enclosed with this application, it is submitted that the parties are litigating before the revenue court pertaining to their rights, which they are drawing from the deceased Jagdish Chandra. Elaborating further, it is submitted that late Jagdish Chandra had executed a 'Will' on 28.10.1978 in favour of his nephew one Lalji Lal and thereafter the same was transferred by Lalji Lal to Shamshuddin, Pramod Kumar Srivastava, Peer Mohammad and Shanti Mishra through a sale deed and later on the above mentioned purchasers had executed a sale deed on 19.05.2005 in favour of the applicants and later on the applicants have executed an agreement to sale in favour of Shashank Deep and Pushpendra.

5. It is vehemently submitted that it is a case, where no property has been transferred and the parties are litigating before the revenue court and there is no element of wrongful gain or wrongful loss. The intended purchaser namely Shashank Deep has been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated

24.04.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 CR.P.C. No.815 of 2024 and another co-accused Vinod Kumar has also been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 22.03.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 CR.P.C. No.650 of 2024.

6. It is also submitted that the applicants are law abiding citizen and there is no apprehension that after being granted facility of anticipatory bail, they may flee from the course of law or otherwise misuse the liberty.

7. Shri Romit Seth, learned counsel appearing for the informant/complainant, at this stage, submits that he be permitted to file detailed objections/counter affidavit in this case vis-a-vis prayer of anticipatory bail of the applicants as the recording of name of the applicants in the revenue record is still in doubt.

8. Learned A.G.A. also submits that sometime may be granted for the purpose of filing of counter affidavit/objections.

9. Having regard to the submissions made by learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the complainant/informant, two weeks' time is granted for filing of counter affidavit/objections.

10. Accordingly, list this case on 30.05.2024.

11. It is provided that till the next date of listing in the event of arrest of the applicants- Mohammad Haneef, Mehndi Hasan (as per F.I.R. Mehndi), Israrul Hasan, Fakhrul Hasan, Mohammad Fareed, Mohammad Saif Ansari, Mohammad Faiz Ansari and Saeedunnisha involved in the above noted case, under any process issued by the trial court, they shall be released on anticipatory bail on their furnishing personal bond of Rs.50,000/- each with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the Police Station concerned/Investigating Officer/trial court with the following conditions: i. The applicant shall not leave India during the pendency of trial without prior permission from the concerned trial Court. ii. The applicant shall Cooperate in the investigation in case of further investigation and will make himself available as and when required by the Investigating officer of the case, even for the recovery of any fact. iii. The applicant shall not make any attempt to influence the prosecution witnesses and will also not commit any crime during his release on anticipatory bail.

12. In case of default of any of above conditions, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law to ensure presence of the applicant.

13. List as directed on 30.05.2024, on which date, this application shall be decided finally." Learned State counsel as well as the counsel for the complainant have failed to demonstrate from the counter affidavits that there is any adversarial fact which are pleaded in the bail application. This Court finds that the applicants were enlarged on anticipatory bail after thorough considering the merits of the case. The learned counsel for the State as well as the counsel for the complainant have also failed to submit any fact that the applicants are not cooperating with the investigation proceedings or otherwise any glaring fact which can adversely affect the merit of the case. In view of the aforesaid, the present anticipatory bail application is hereby allowed while extending anticipatory bail to the applicants namely, Mohammad Haneef, Mehndi Hasan (as per F.I.R. Mehndi), Israrul Hasan, Fakhrul Hasan, Mohammad Fareed, Mohammad Saif Ansari, Mohammad Faiz Ansari and Saeedunnisha till disposal of the trial subject to the following conditions:- (i) that the applicants shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; (ii) that the applicants 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 applicants shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court; (iv) that the applicants shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted; and (v) that the applicants 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 :- 5.2.2025 Shravan

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, Mr. Akash Singh, Advocate holding brief of Shri Romit Seth, learned counsel for the complainant, 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. 307 of 2022, under Sections 420,467,468,471 I.P.C., P.S.- Kotwali, District- Sitapur. From perusal of the order sheet, it appears that on 15.5.2024, following order was passed wherein the present applicants have been granted interim anticipatory bail:- " 1. Heard Shri M. E. Khan, learned counsel for the applicants as well as learned A.G.A. for the State, Shri Romit Seth, learned counsel appearing for the informant/complainant and perused the record.

2. The present anticipatory bail application has been moved by the accused/applicants- Mohammad Haneef, Mehndi Hasan (as per F.I.R. Mehndi), Israrul Hasan, Fakhrul Hasan, Mohammad Fareed, Mohammad Saif Ansari, Mohammad Faiz Ansari and Saeedunnisha in Case Crime No.307 of 2022, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C, Police Station Kotwali, District Sitapur, with the prayer to enlarge them on anticipatory bail as they are apprehending arrest in the above-mentioned case.

3. Learned counsel for the accused-applicants while pressing the anticipatory bail application submits that the applicants have been falsely implicated in this case and they have not committed any offence as claimed by the prosecution.

4. While drawing attention of this Court towards many documents enclosed with this application, it is submitted that the parties are litigating before the revenue court pertaining to their rights, which they are drawing from the deceased Jagdish Chandra. Elaborating further, it is submitted that late Jagdish Chandra had executed a 'Will' on 28.10.1978 in favour of his nephew one Lalji Lal and thereafter the same was transferred by Lalji Lal to Shamshuddin, Pramod Kumar Srivastava, Peer Mohammad and Shanti Mishra through a sale deed and later on the above mentioned purchasers had executed a sale deed on 19.05.2005 in favour of the applicants and later on the applicants have executed an agreement to sale in favour of Shashank Deep and Pushpendra.

5. It is vehemently submitted that it is a case, where no property has been transferred and the parties are litigating before the revenue court and there is no element of wrongful gain or wrongful loss. The intended purchaser namely Shashank Deep has been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated

24.04.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 CR.P.C. No.815 of 2024 and another co-accused Vinod Kumar has also been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 22.03.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 CR.P.C. No.650 of 2024.

6. It is also submitted that the applicants are law abiding citizen and there is no apprehension that after being granted facility of anticipatory bail, they may flee from the course of law or otherwise misuse the liberty.

7. Shri Romit Seth, learned counsel appearing for the informant/complainant, at this stage, submits that he be permitted to file detailed objections/counter affidavit in this case vis-a-vis prayer of anticipatory bail of the applicants as the recording of name of the applicants in the revenue record is still in doubt.

8. Learned A.G.A. also submits that sometime may be granted for the purpose of filing of counter affidavit/objections.

9. Having regard to the submissions made by learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the complainant/informant, two weeks' time is granted for filing of counter affidavit/objections.

10. Accordingly, list this case on 30.05.2024.

11. It is provided that till the next date of listing in the event of arrest of the applicants- Mohammad Haneef, Mehndi Hasan (as per F.I.R. Mehndi), Israrul Hasan, Fakhrul Hasan, Mohammad Fareed, Mohammad Saif Ansari, Mohammad Faiz Ansari and Saeedunnisha involved in the above noted case, under any process issued by the trial court, they shall be released on anticipatory bail on their furnishing personal bond of Rs.50,000/- each with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the Police Station concerned/Investigating Officer/trial court with the following conditions: i. The applicant shall not leave India during the pendency of trial without prior permission from the concerned trial Court. ii. The applicant shall Cooperate in the investigation in case of further investigation and will make himself available as and when required by the Investigating officer of the case, even for the recovery of any fact. iii. The applicant shall not make any attempt to influence the prosecution witnesses and will also not commit any crime during his release on anticipatory bail.

12. In case of default of any of above conditions, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law to ensure presence of the applicant.

13. List as directed on 30.05.2024, on which date, this application shall be decided finally." Learned State counsel as well as the counsel for the complainant have failed to demonstrate from the counter affidavits that there is any adversarial fact which are pleaded in the bail application. This Court finds that the applicants were enlarged on anticipatory bail after thorough considering the merits of the case. The learned counsel for the State as well as the counsel for the complainant have also failed to submit any fact that the applicants are not cooperating with the investigation proceedings or otherwise any glaring fact which can adversely affect the merit of the case. In view of the aforesaid, the present anticipatory bail application is hereby allowed while extending anticipatory bail to the applicants namely, Mohammad Haneef, Mehndi Hasan (as per F.I.R. Mehndi), Israrul Hasan, Fakhrul Hasan, Mohammad Fareed, Mohammad Saif Ansari, Mohammad Faiz Ansari and Saeedunnisha till disposal of the trial subject to the following conditions:- (i) that the applicants shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; (ii) that the applicants 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 applicants shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court; (iv) that the applicants shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted; and (v) that the applicants 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 :- 5.2.2025 Shravan