The Allahabad High Court has allowed the anticipatory bail application of Peace Party National President Dr. Ayub Khan for allegedly threatening to kill Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath.
A Single Bench of Justice Sanjay Kumar Pachori passed this order while hearing a Criminal Misc Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 Cr.P.C filed by Dr. Ayub.
The Anticipatory Bail Application has been filed by the applicant namely, Dr Ayub with a prayer to grant him anticipatory bail in Case under Sections 295A, 500, 504, 505, 506, IPC, Police Station – Cantt, District – Gorakhpur after rejecting anticipatory bail application of the applicant by Sessions Judge, Gorakhpur order dated 17.12.2021.
The facts of the case are that the first information report dated 26.7.2016 has been lodged by Sunil Singh against the applicant and unknown persons stating therein that on 25.7.2016 when the first informant along with two companions were coming from the side of planetarium, they saw that there was a huge crowd in the Champa Devi Park and from the stage the applicant, who was the National President of Peace Party and Member of Legislative Assembly, Khalilabad, was abusing the then Member of Parliament, Gorakhpur and Goraksha Pethadheeshwar by saying that he was a terrorist and would kill him wherever he had been found and would capture the Gorakhnath Temple.
After lodging the first information report and completing the investigation, a charge sheet was submitted on 11.4.2017 and the concerned magistrate took cognizance on 20.3.2021 in the matter.
The submission of the senior counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the case due to political rivalry.
It is further submitted that the applicant came to know for the first time on 14.10.2021 about the case and no notice has been served upon the applicant under Section 41A, Cr.P.C. He applied for anticipatory bail before the court below, which has been rejected on 17.12.2021.
It is also submitted that this Court has granted interim anticipatory bail to the applicant on 7.1.2022, which is extended till date. It is further submitted that the first informant was the President of Hindu Yuva Vahini Sangathan. At that time the applicant was National President of Peace Party and renowned surgeon of Barhalganj, District Gorakhpur.
Counsel for the applicant said that no electronic evidence has been collected against the applicant to prove the case. First information report has been lodged on the basis of false and frivolous allegations with object to gain political mileage.
Also Read: Gauhati High Court disposes PIL on no treatment for ailment to Covid positive people in Assam
Counsel for the applicant further said that offence under Section 295A, 500, 504, 505, 506, IPC is not made out against the applicant. All the offences except Section 295A & 506, IPC are bailable offences.
It is further submitted that after filing of counter affidavit, A.G.A has not pointed out as to what material was recovered from the possession of the applicant. It is further submitted that no date and time of the incident has been mentioned in the FIR.
It is further submitted that the applicant has previous criminal history of five other cases, which are mostly related to Representation of People Act and in all the cases, the applicant has been granted bail.
Additional Government Advocate has vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the applicant and submits that the applicant has criminal history of ten cases apart from the case. It is further submitted that at the time of lodging the FIR, the applicant has criminal history of only five cases, which are related to political rivalry.
Also Read: Technical Aquittal and Honorable acquittal are two different things: Supreme Court
“It is a settled position of law that the anticipatory bail being an extraordinary privilege should be granted only in exceptional cases. Parameters for grant of anticipatory bail in a serious offence are required to be satisfied, where the Court is prima facie of the view that the applicant has falsely roped in the crime and would not misuse his liberty.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Sushila Agrawal Vs State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC Online SC 98, ground for grant of anticipatory bail is made out”
-the Court observed.
Also Read: Supreme Court hears plea of advocate denied permission to travel for taking Sputnik V vaccine
The Court ordered that,
In case of arrest, the applicant, Dr Ayub is directed to be enlarged on anticipatory bail in above case crime number till the conclusion of trial, on his furnishing personal bond of Rs 25,000/- and two sureties each of like amount before the Station House Officer of Police Station/Court concerned with the following conditions:-
(i) The applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by the police officer as and when required, if investigation is in progress;
(ii) The applicant 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 such person from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;
(iii) The applicant shall not leave the country without the previous permission of the Court and if he has a passport, the same shall be deposited by him before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned/Court concerned;
(iv) The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by the applicant along-with a self attested identity proof of the said person (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number to which the said Aadhar Card is linked;
(v) The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.
The Investigating Officer will continue with the investigation, if it is in progress and will not be affected by this order. A copy of the order shall also be produced before the S.P/S.S.P concerned by the applicants, within a week, if the investigation is still in progress, who shall ensure compliance of the order. With the aforesaid directions, the Anticipatory Bail Application is allowed.