Court No. - 69
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 14961 of 2021 Applicant :- Ikrar Ali And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Mirza Ali Zulfaqar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ajit Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A.
The instant anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicants, Ikrar and Irfan with a prayer to release them on anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.39 of 2021, under Section 379 I.P.C. and 2/3 Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984, Police Station Shahbad, district Rampur.
Prior notice of this bail application was served in the office of Government Advocate and as per Chapter XVIII, Rule 18 of the Allahabad High Court Rules and as per direction dated 20.11.2020 of this Court in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 Cr.P.C. No. 8072 of 2020, Govind Mishra @ Chhotu Versus State of U.P., hence, this anticipatory bail application is being heard. Grant of further time to the learned A.G.A. as per Section 438 (3) Cr.P.C. (U. P. Amendment) is not required.
The First Information Report of this incident was got lodged by the complainant, Lekhpal against the Fursat Ali and his brother. It was alleged in the first information report that Fursat Ali and his brothers had cut 676 eucalyptus trees from Khata No.1272, Gata No.9, which is registered in the revenue records as Gram Samaj Land situated in the village Madaiyan Vade, Tehsil Shahbad, district Rampur. It was also alleged that Furst Ali had taken the wood of 324 trees and wood of 352 tress are lying at the place of occurrence.
Learned counsel for the applicants submit that applicants are innocent and have falsely been implicated in the present case. He submitted that first information report has been lodged just to tarnish the image of the applicants and their family members with an object to injure the reputation of the applicants by having them so arrested. He submitted that no proceedings under Sections 82 and 83 Cr.P.C. have been initiated against applicants. He submitted that charge sheet has not been filed till date. He submitted that applicants undertakes to cooperate during investigation and she will not tamper with the evidence in any way.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail. He submitted that it is not a case of malicious prosecution of the applicant in the present case. He submitted that there are prima-facie allegations against the applicants and first information report has not been lodged with an object to tarnish the image of the applicants, hence the applicants are not entitled to be enlarged on anticipatory bail.
After hearing learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of the material on record, considering the antecedents of the applicants, considering the gravity of offence, considering the possibility of the applicant to flee from justice where the accusation has not been made with the object of injuring or humiliating the applicant by having them so arrested and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court does not find it a fit case to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant.
Accordingly, the anticipatory bail is rejected.
Order Date :- 20.12.2021 R./