SAUMITRA DAYAL SINGH,J. - (1.) Heard Sri N.I. Jafri, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri S.I. Jafri, learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State.
(2.) Vide order dated 19.08.2020, the applicant has been granted interim anticipatory bail. The said order is quoted below :- "Heard Sri N.I. Jafri, learned Senior Advocate assisted by S.I. Jafri, learned counsel for the applicant, and Sri Vinod Diwakar, learned Additional Advocate General for the State through Video Conferencing and perused the record. This anticipatory bail application (under section 438 Cr.P.C.) has been moved seeking bail in Case Crime No. 576 of 2019 under sections 147, 452, 504, 323, 307, 354, 392, 447, 427 of I.P.C., Police Station Ganj, District Rampur , during the pendency of the investigation. As per FIR the prosecution case is that the informant had purchased a plot in Rampur in Mohalla Dongarpur measuring 200 yards in the name of his wife and after getting constructed a house thereon, he was residing. In the morning at about 10.00 A.M. on 6.12.2016, C.O. Rampur, Ale Hasan, Contractor Barkat Ali, Sub-Inspector, Firoz Khan, Pervez Alam and local Engineer of U.P. Jal Nigam Imran Khan and some more other persons named in the FIR, came there abusing the informant and entered into his house and started beating his wife. Akram Khan co-accused had made a fire by illegal 315 bore pistol by which the informant escaped unhurt. The co-accused Barkat Ali and Firoz Khan alongwith Ale Hasan, Abdulla Pervez tried to molest his wife and her clothes were torn. The co-accused Ale Hasan was telling the accused that they were men of Azam Khan and the officers would do nothing against them even if any complaint is made. Apart from this, these accused had taken away 8 tola silver, 4 tola gold and Rs.20,000/- in cash. Submission made by the learned counsel for the applicant is that this FIR has been lodged after delay of two years and eight months as the occurrence had taken place on 6.12.2016 and the FIR has been lodged on 21.8.2019 without any justifiable reason for the delay. It is a no injury case. The applicant has been falsely implicated. The main role has been assigned to Ale Hasan who has already been granted anticipatory bail by the court below, order of which is annexed at page-44 of the paper book. It is further argued by him that reason of false implication has been mentioned in paragraph no. 14 onwards of the affidavit in which it is mentioned that the complainant of this case is claiming his right in respect of land in question which is a trenching ground belonging to Municipal Board, Rampur and the same is Non-Z.A. land. The complainant as well as other persons who are land grabbers and in furtherance of the criminal conspiracy have got a forged entry of the order dated 3.12.1968 passed by the then SDM, Rampur and thereafter on that basis they claimed their right over the said property and when the Tehsildar, Sadar, Rampur came to know about this forged entry, the Municipal Board, Rampur has submitted a detailed report on 16.8.2012 before SDM, Sadar, Rampur whereby it was informed that khasra no. 203 of Non-Z.A. 1360 Fasli of village Dungarpur, Tehsil Sadar, the total land area measured 15 Bigha, 14 Biswa fall under different gata number and they were recorded in the name of Municipal Board, Rampur but in Non-Z.A. Khatauni 1375 Fasli an entry regarding order dated 3.10.1968 was made whereby the land (Area of 9 Bigha, 3 Biswa) out of the aforesaid land falling under different gata number, have been entered in the name of Nawabjaan Khan, Rahmat Ali and Sajjat Ali, all sons of Masita Khan. The entry pertaining to the said order dated 3.6.1968 in the khatauni was forged and there was no record pertaining to the order dated 3.6.1968 purported to have been passed by the SDM in revenue record. He recommended for removing the name of the land grabbers in khatauni by expunging forged entry of the order dated 3.10.1968. It is further argued that on the basis of the report of Tehsildar dated 16.8.2012, SDO Sadar, Rampur vide order dated 3.9.2012 in case 78 of 2011-12 (State vs. Rahmat Ali and others) under section 33/39 of L.R. Act, had removed the name of the aforesaid land grabbers from the revenue record and directed to record the said land in the name of Municipal Board, Rampur, thereafter the Municipal Board had got constructed 1200 house for poor persons and they were allotted to such poor person. Now after such considerable delay a false case has been concocted by the informant in collusion with the present authority mentioning that they have been ousted from the land in question. As regards other criminal case against the applicant, in paragraph no. 51 of the affidavit, it has been mentioned that the applicant is neither a previous convict nor has he any criminal history so far except the present case and thereafter two more cases being case crime nos. 556 of 2019 and 629 of 2019. It is further argued that all the cases have been imposed against the applicant simultaneously. He has apprehension of imminent arrest. If released on bail he would not misuse the liberty and would co-operate with the investigation. On the other hand learned Additional Advocate General has vehemently opposed for grant of bail and has stated that the co-accused Azhar Khan, who has not been named in the FIR, his anticipatory bail has been rejected on 10.7.2020, copy of that order has not been filed by him as he has not got any opportunity to file the same. He has further stated that the applicant has been issued notice to appear before the Investigating Officer but he did not cooperate in the investigation. Five raids were made at his house but he was not found. Recovery of jewellery which has been mentioned in the FIR, is to be made from the present accused for which custodial interrogation would be required. Looking to the fact that considerable delay has been made in lodging the FIR and only after two years and eight month FIR has been lodged and co-accused, Ale Hasan has been granted bail whose role is much greater in the commission of the present offence, taking into consideration the gravity of accusation, there being no criminal antecedents of the applicant except above and there being no possibility of his fleeing from justice, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the applicant is entitled to be released on interim anticipatory bail in this case. Learned Additional Advocate General prays for and is granted four weeks time to file counter affidavit. List this case on 21.9.2020. In the event of arrest of the applicant Parvez Alam @ Pravesh Alam involved in the aforesaid case shall be released on interim anticipatory bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the police station concerned with the following conditions. 1) that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; 2) that 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 him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence; 3) that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court; 4) that in default of any of the conditions mentioned above, the investigating officers shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant."
(3.) Though counter affidavit has been served on learned counsel for the applicant, however, the same has been attempted to file physically though it is an e-petition, at the same time, learned AGA could not raise any serious objection as may disentitle the applicant to anticipatory bail.;