Court No. - 74
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 14703 of 2021 Applicant :- Sabir Dishwala@ Sabir Saifi Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ajay Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Pradeep Kumar Srivastava,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
This anticipatory bail application has been filed by the applicant Sabir Dishwala@ Sabir Saifi in Case Crime No.500 of 2021, under sections 452, 307, 323, 504, 506, 188, 269, 270 I.P.C. and Section 3(1) of Epidemic (Amendment) Disease Act,2020 , P.S. Hapur Nagar, District Hapur.
The FIR has been lodged by the informant against the accused persons including the applicant and the allegation is that the informant while filling the pit in-front of his house, the accused persons came and prevented, whereupon, accused persons Salman and Sabir brought knife from their house and the informant went in his house. The accused persons also entered in his house and with intention to kill him, Salman assaulted him by knife on his neck and in the process of saving himself and the injured tried to save, he sustained injuries on his forehead. The accused persons also injured his 14 years old daughter by assaulting her by bricks.
Submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. It has been further submitted that the daughter of the informant has sustained only simple injury on her nose, therefore, the benefit of anticipatory bail should be given to him. It is further submitted that applicant has no criminal history and applicant is prepared to furnish sureties and bonds, there is no possibility of her either fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the evidence.
Learned AGA has vehemently opposed the prayer of bail and has submitted that in the incident the informant and his daughter had sustained injuries and, therefore, there is no reason on the basis of which anticipatory bail may be allowed in favour of the applicant. It has also been submitted that the incident was caused during the period of pandemic.
Considered the submissions of both the sides. The FIR version discloses that the informant and his daughter have sustained injuries in the incident which was caused by the accused persons, who have been named in the FIR including the applicant. The ground which are being alleged from the side of the applicant may be a good ground for the consideration of regular bail application but the same is not sufficient for giving the accused persons benefit of anticipatory bail. As such, I do not find any ground for giving benefit of anticipatory bail, hence the anticipatory bail application filed by the applicant is rejected.
Order Date :- 27.9.2021 Mini