High Court · 2025
Case Details
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. The present application under Section 438 Cr.PC./ new 482 BNSS has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in case crime No. 285 of 2016, under Sections 147, 148, 323, 504, 506 IPC & Section 3(1)(x) of SC/ ST Act, Police Station- Mandiyaon , District- Lucknow. From perusal of the order sheet, it appears that on 21.01.2025 following order was passed wherein the present applicants have been granted interim anticipatory bail:- " Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned AGA for the State and perused the record. The instant anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicants with the prayer to release them on anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 285 of 2016, under Sections 147, 148, 323, 504, 506 of the I.P.C. and Section 3(1)(x) of the S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station-Mandiyaon, District-Lucknow. As per the prosecution story, in the morning of 07-04-2016, the forcible possession over the land in question, was attempted and when restrained, they started assaulting and hurling abuses and the applicant no. 2/Imran took out his revolver with an intent to commit murder and once, the opposite party no. 2, ran towards his house for rescuing, he was chased and assaulted and the family members were also assaulted inside the house. It is contended by the learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants are innocent and have falsely been implicated. He submits that since the applicant no. 1 had lodged the first information report against the complainant and other persons on 07-04-2016 at 12.50 P.M. at Case Crime No. 284 of 2016, under sections 147, 148, 149, 354-A, 323, 504 & 506 of the I.P.C., in retaliation thereof, at 05.40 P.M., the present first information report is lodged, wherein the applicants have been implicated so as to mount pressure over them, as they may not say anything in their statements independently. He next submits that infact the opposite party no. 2, in collusion with Gram Pradhan,was trying to grab the land of the applicant no. 2. He added that there is tremendous improvement in the statement of the complainant/opposite party no. 2 recorded under section 161 of Cr.P.C., which indicates that the prosecution story is false and concocted. He also submits that the motive to commit the alleged offence is missing in the present matter. He further submits that the co-accused including Smt. Ramawati, have already been granted bail by the learned court below. He next added that the applicants are cooperating in the criminal proceedings and the criminal history of the applicant nos. 2 & 4, has been explained. He submits that no custodial interrogation is required in the present matter, whereas, the police is adamant to arrest the applicants. Therefore, submission is that the applicants may be enlarged on anticipatory bail. On the other hand, learned AGA appearing for the State has opposed the contentions aforesaid and submitted that there are serious allegations against the applicants and as such, they are not entitled for any relief. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and after perusal of the record, this Court finds it to be a fit case of anticipatory bail. Till the next date of listing, the present applicants,Mana Singh, Mohd. Imran Khan @ Imran Khan, Naseem Khan & Faheem Khan @ Faheem Ahmad, shall be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on an interim anticipatory bail on their furnishing personal bond s and two solvent sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with 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 them 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 in case charge sheet is submitted the applicants shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial; (v) that the applicants shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness; (vi) that the applicants shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted; (vii) that in case of breach of any of the above conditions the court concerned shall have the liberty to cancel the bail. Let notice be issued to opposite party no. 2 returnable at an early date. Steps be taken within a week. If the steps are taken, the office shall proceed accordingly. List/put up this matter in Third Week of February 2025. In the meantime, learned counsel for the State as well as opposite party no. 2 shall file their counter affidavits. " 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 applicants were enlarged on anticipatory bail after thorough considering the merits of the case. The learned counsel for the State has 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, Mana Singh, Mohd. Imran Khan @ Imran Khan, Naseem Ahmad & Faheem Khan @ Faheem Ahmad 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/ her 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 prior permission of the court; (iv) that the applicants shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed, unless their 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 :- 4.3.2025 (Manoj K.) MANOJ KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. The present application under Section 438 Cr.PC./ new 482 BNSS has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in case crime No. 285 of 2016, under Sections 147, 148, 323, 504, 506 IPC & Section 3(1)(x) of SC/ ST Act, Police Station- Mandiyaon , District- Lucknow. From perusal of the order sheet, it appears that on 21.01.2025 following order was passed wherein the present applicants have been granted interim anticipatory bail:- " Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned AGA for the State and perused the record. The instant anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicants with the prayer to release them on anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 285 of 2016, under Sections 147, 148, 323, 504, 506 of the I.P.C. and Section 3(1)(x) of the S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station-Mandiyaon, District-Lucknow. As per the prosecution story, in the morning of 07-04-2016, the forcible possession over the land in question, was attempted and when restrained, they started assaulting and hurling abuses and the applicant no. 2/Imran took out his revolver with an intent to commit murder and once, the opposite party no. 2, ran towards his house for rescuing, he was chased and assaulted and the family members were also assaulted inside the house. It is contended by the learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants are innocent and have falsely been implicated. He submits that since the applicant no. 1 had lodged the first information report against the complainant and other persons on 07-04-2016 at 12.50 P.M. at Case Crime No. 284 of 2016, under sections 147, 148, 149, 354-A, 323, 504 & 506 of the I.P.C., in retaliation thereof, at 05.40 P.M., the present first information report is lodged, wherein the applicants have been implicated so as to mount pressure over them, as they may not say anything in their statements independently. He next submits that infact the opposite party no. 2, in collusion with Gram Pradhan,was trying to grab the land of the applicant no. 2. He added that there is tremendous improvement in the statement of the complainant/opposite party no. 2 recorded under section 161 of Cr.P.C., which indicates that the prosecution story is false and concocted. He also submits that the motive to commit the alleged offence is missing in the present matter. He further submits that the co-accused including Smt. Ramawati, have already been granted bail by the learned court below. He next added that the applicants are cooperating in the criminal proceedings and the criminal history of the applicant nos. 2 & 4, has been explained. He submits that no custodial interrogation is required in the present matter, whereas, the police is adamant to arrest the applicants. Therefore, submission is that the applicants may be enlarged on anticipatory bail. On the other hand, learned AGA appearing for the State has opposed the contentions aforesaid and submitted that there are serious allegations against the applicants and as such, they are not entitled for any relief. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and after perusal of the record, this Court finds it to be a fit case of anticipatory bail. Till the next date of listing, the present applicants,Mana Singh, Mohd. Imran Khan @ Imran Khan, Naseem Khan & Faheem Khan @ Faheem Ahmad, shall be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on an interim anticipatory bail on their furnishing personal bond s and two solvent sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with 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 them 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 in case charge sheet is submitted the applicants shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial; (v) that the applicants shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness; (vi) that the applicants shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted; (vii) that in case of breach of any of the above conditions the court concerned shall have the liberty to cancel the bail. Let notice be issued to opposite party no. 2 returnable at an early date. Steps be taken within a week. If the steps are taken, the office shall proceed accordingly. List/put up this matter in Third Week of February 2025. In the meantime, learned counsel for the State as well as opposite party no. 2 shall file their counter affidavits. " 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 applicants were enlarged on anticipatory bail after thorough considering the merits of the case. The learned counsel for the State has 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, Mana Singh, Mohd. Imran Khan @ Imran Khan, Naseem Ahmad & Faheem Khan @ Faheem Ahmad 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/ her 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 prior permission of the court; (iv) that the applicants shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed, unless their 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 :- 4.3.2025 (Manoj K.) MANOJ KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench