Others v. State of U.P. and

1. Heard Sri Subodh Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Ashok Kumar Singh, learned AGA for the State .

2. As per learned counsel for the applicants, the present applicants are apprehending their arrest in Case Crime/ FIR No.470 of 2023, under Sections 467, 420, 323, 504 & 380 IPC, Police Station- Kheri, District- Lakhimpur Kheri.

3. At the very outset, learned counsel for the applicants has drawn attention of this Court towards the impugned FIR, which has been lodged pursuant to the application being filed under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. for the allegations of 2021 and of 2023. Further attention has been drawn towards Annexure No.2 of the application, which is an order dated 17.11.2023 passed by this Court in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No.8630 of 2023, Abdulla and 2 Others Vs. State of U.P. and 3 Others, whereby this Court granted interim order to the present applicants till completion of the investigation and filing of the police report. Learned counsel has stated that in compliance of the aforesaid order, the present applicants cooperated in the investigation, thereafter charge sheet has been filed against them. Further, co-accused Abdullah, who was Chairman of the Society, namely, Syed Nazir Hussain Educational and Welfare Society, Deehpur Station Road, Kheri has been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 15.01.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 Cr.P.C. No.46 of 2025 and applicant no.1 was office bearer of the Society and applicant no.2 was power of attorney holder to do the pairvi of the cases of the Society and are having similar role with co-accused Abdullah, therefore, on the basis of principles of parity, the present applicants may also be granted anticipatory bail.

4. Learned counsel for the applicants has stated that the law is settled on the point that if any accused persons have cooperated in the investigation and with their cooperation, charge sheet has been filed, after filing of the charge sheet their arrest would not be warranted unless the Court concerned has got any specific reason to take them into judicial custody. Learned counsel has stated that the applicants undertake that they shall further cooperate in the trial proceedings in the same manner as they have cooperated in the investigation, therefore, liberty may be given to them to appear before the learned Trial Court and may file sureties and personal bonds before the learned Trial Court and that may be accepted without taking them into judicial custody. Such protection may be given to the present applicants in view of the dictum of the Apex Court in re; Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi), 2020 SCC online SC 98.

5. Learned AGA has opposed the aforesaid request of learned counsel for the applicants by submitting that during investigation, incriminating material has been found against the present applicants, therefore, charge sheet has been filed. The Division Bench of this Court has protected the liberty of the present applicants till filing of the charge sheet and now, charge sheet has been filed, therefore, the present applicants should appear before the learned Trial Court to participate in the trial proceedings.

6. Be that as it may, since the present applicants have cooperated in the investigation and have not been arrested on account of interim order being granted by this Court; they are giving undertaking that they shall cooperate in the trial proceedings and shall not misuse the liberty of anticipatory bail, the Apex Court in re; Aman Preet Singh vs. C.B.I. through Director, Criminal Appeal No.929 of 2021 (arising out of SLP (Crl.) No.5234/2021), has already held that if the accused person has not been arrested during investigation, his arrest would not be warranted after filing of the charge sheet unless the court has got specific reason to that effect; co-accused Abdullah, having similar role, has been granted anticipatory bail till conclusion of the trial by this Court and the undertaking of the present applicants that they shall cooperate in the trial proceedings in the same manner as they have cooperated in the investigation, their liberty may be protected till conclusion of the trial in view of the dictum of the Apex Court in re; Sushila Aggarwal (supra). It is made clear that this Court has not entered into merits of the issue.

7. Accordingly, the instant anticipatory bail application is allowed.

8. Anticipatory bail is granted to the applicants till conclusion of the trial and applicants- Atiqur Rahman and Mohd. Saleem Ahmad shall not be taken into judicial custody in the aforesaid case crime number till conclusion of the trial with the following conditions:- I. that the present applicants shall appear before the learned Trial Court concerned within fifteen days from today or on the next date fixed, whichever is earlier, to participate in the trial proceedings and shall furnish a personal bond and two sureties of Rupees one lakh each, which may be accepted by the learned Trial Court, without taking the present applicants into judicial custody. Those sureties may be directed to be verified but the applicants may not be taken into judicial custody. In case any adverse report is received in respect of those sureties, any appropriate coercive steps may be taken by the learned Trial Court inasmuch as in that condition, this protection would not be available to the present applicants. II. that the applicants shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; III. 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; IV. that the applicants shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court; V. that in default of any of the conditions mentioned above, the prosecution shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicants; VI. that the applicants shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness; VII. that the applicants shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted. Order Date :- 22.1.2025 RBS/- [Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.] RAM BIR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

1. Heard Sri Subodh Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Ashok Kumar Singh, learned AGA for the State .

2. As per learned counsel for the applicants, the present applicants are apprehending their arrest in Case Crime/ FIR No.470 of 2023, under Sections 467, 420, 323, 504 & 380 IPC, Police Station- Kheri, District- Lakhimpur Kheri.

3. At the very outset, learned counsel for the applicants has drawn attention of this Court towards the impugned FIR, which has been lodged pursuant to the application being filed under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. for the allegations of 2021 and of 2023. Further attention has been drawn towards Annexure No.2 of the application, which is an order dated 17.11.2023 passed by this Court in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No.8630 of 2023, Abdulla and 2 Others Vs. State of U.P. and 3 Others, whereby this Court granted interim order to the present applicants till completion of the investigation and filing of the police report. Learned counsel has stated that in compliance of the aforesaid order, the present applicants cooperated in the investigation, thereafter charge sheet has been filed against them. Further, co-accused Abdullah, who was Chairman of the Society, namely, Syed Nazir Hussain Educational and Welfare Society, Deehpur Station Road, Kheri has been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 15.01.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 Cr.P.C. No.46 of 2025 and applicant no.1 was office bearer of the Society and applicant no.2 was power of attorney holder to do the pairvi of the cases of the Society and are having similar role with co-accused Abdullah, therefore, on the basis of principles of parity, the present applicants may also be granted anticipatory bail.

4. Learned counsel for the applicants has stated that the law is settled on the point that if any accused persons have cooperated in the investigation and with their cooperation, charge sheet has been filed, after filing of the charge sheet their arrest would not be warranted unless the Court concerned has got any specific reason to take them into judicial custody. Learned counsel has stated that the applicants undertake that they shall further cooperate in the trial proceedings in the same manner as they have cooperated in the investigation, therefore, liberty may be given to them to appear before the learned Trial Court and may file sureties and personal bonds before the learned Trial Court and that may be accepted without taking them into judicial custody. Such protection may be given to the present applicants in view of the dictum of the Apex Court in re; Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi), 2020 SCC online SC 98.

5. Learned AGA has opposed the aforesaid request of learned counsel for the applicants by submitting that during investigation, incriminating material has been found against the present applicants, therefore, charge sheet has been filed. The Division Bench of this Court has protected the liberty of the present applicants till filing of the charge sheet and now, charge sheet has been filed, therefore, the present applicants should appear before the learned Trial Court to participate in the trial proceedings.

6. Be that as it may, since the present applicants have cooperated in the investigation and have not been arrested on account of interim order being granted by this Court; they are giving undertaking that they shall cooperate in the trial proceedings and shall not misuse the liberty of anticipatory bail, the Apex Court in re; Aman Preet Singh vs. C.B.I. through Director, Criminal Appeal No.929 of 2021 (arising out of SLP (Crl.) No.5234/2021), has already held that if the accused person has not been arrested during investigation, his arrest would not be warranted after filing of the charge sheet unless the court has got specific reason to that effect; co-accused Abdullah, having similar role, has been granted anticipatory bail till conclusion of the trial by this Court and the undertaking of the present applicants that they shall cooperate in the trial proceedings in the same manner as they have cooperated in the investigation, their liberty may be protected till conclusion of the trial in view of the dictum of the Apex Court in re; Sushila Aggarwal (supra). It is made clear that this Court has not entered into merits of the issue.

7. Accordingly, the instant anticipatory bail application is allowed.

8. Anticipatory bail is granted to the applicants till conclusion of the trial and applicants- Atiqur Rahman and Mohd. Saleem Ahmad shall not be taken into judicial custody in the aforesaid case crime number till conclusion of the trial with the following conditions:- I. that the present applicants shall appear before the learned Trial Court concerned within fifteen days from today or on the next date fixed, whichever is earlier, to participate in the trial proceedings and shall furnish a personal bond and two sureties of Rupees one lakh each, which may be accepted by the learned Trial Court, without taking the present applicants into judicial custody. Those sureties may be directed to be verified but the applicants may not be taken into judicial custody. In case any adverse report is received in respect of those sureties, any appropriate coercive steps may be taken by the learned Trial Court inasmuch as in that condition, this protection would not be available to the present applicants. II. that the applicants shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; III. 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; IV. that the applicants shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court; V. that in default of any of the conditions mentioned above, the prosecution shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicants; VI. that the applicants shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness; VII. that the applicants shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted. Order Date :- 22.1.2025 RBS/- [Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.] RAM BIR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench