Mohammad Aslam & Anr. v. State of U.P

It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicants that applicants are innocent and they have an apprehension that they may be arrested in the above-mentioned case, whereas, there is no credible evidence against them. It was submitted that at the relevant time applicant No. 1 was working as Manager and applicant No. 2 was working as Principal of the Alfala Public School Radhana Inayatpur, District-Meerut. As per prosecution version, in the year 2010-2011, a grant of Rs. 2,45,000/- was provided to the said school for scholarship of the Pre-Matric students of the school but the applicants in connivance with co- accused persons/officials of Minority Welfare Department, misappropriated the said funds and did not distribute the same amongst the students. Learned counsel submitted that the prosecution case is based mainly on the ground that the said scholarship amount has not been transferred into the accounts of students, whereas, at that time there was no such provision. In fact government has issued a Government Order in the year 2014 that scholarship amount has to be transferred into the accounts of students. The said amount of Rs. 2,45,000/- was paid to the eligible students as scholarship in cash. The students have filed their affidavits that they have received scholarship amount. The applicants undertake to co-operate during investigation and trial and they would appear as and when required by the investigating agency or Court. It has been stated that in case, applicants are granted anticipatory bail, they 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.

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 applicants and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on merit of the case, a case for anticipatory bail is made out.

In the event of arrest of the applicants- Mohammad Aslam and Smt. Kamar Jahan involved in the aforesaid case crime shall be released on anticipatory bail on their 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/court concerned with the following conditions :- (i) the applicants shall make themself available for interrogation by the police as and when required; (ii) 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/her/them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; (iii) the applicants would co-operate during investigation and trial and would not misuse the liberty of bail.

In default of any of the conditions, the Investigating Officer/prosecution shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicants. Order Date :- 3.10.2023 Suraj SURAJ YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad