The Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court has granted Bail to Masood Ahmed, a student leader, in connection with the 2020 Hathras ‘Conspiracy’ case.
The Division Bench of Justice Attau Rahman Masoodi and Justice Ajai Kumar Srivastava-I passed this order while hearing a criminal appeal filed by Masood.
The appeal under Section 21(4) of the National Investigation Agency Act, 2008, has been filed by the appellant, Masood challenging the order dated 06.12.2022 passed by Special Judge, NIA/ATS, Additional District and Sessions Judge, Lucknow in Bail Application, arising out of Case under Sections 153-A, 295-A, 124-A, 120B I.P.C, Sections 17 and 18 of Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 and Sections 65 and 72 of I.T Act, 2000, Police Station Manth, District Mathura, whereby bail application of the appellant was rejected.
Counsel for the appellant has submitted that initially the first information report came to be lodged against four accused persons including the appellant.
His further submission is that there is no allegation against the appellant that he was associated with any terrorist organization or was soliciting any donation or funding or had any linkage with either P.F.I or CFI.
There are about 55 witnesses of the prosecution as per the charge-sheet. The appellant has been languishing in jail since 05.10.2020.
Counsel for the appellant has vehemently submitted that the named co-accused, namely, Sidhique Kappan, who has been assigned the lead role, has been granted bail by the Apex Court vide order dated 09.09.2022. His further submission is that the other co-accused, namely, Alam @ Mohammad Alam, who was also named in the F.I.R, Atikur Rahman, K.A Rauf Sherif and Mohd. Danish @ Tunnu have been granted bail by coordinate Benches of the Court vide orders dated 23.08.2022, 15.03.2023, 7.7.2023 and 7.7.2023. It is also argued that no criminal antecedents of the appellant could be found by the investigating agency after a thorough investigation.
On the basis of aforesaid submissions, counsel for the appellant prays that the appeal deserves to be allowed and the appellant deserves to be released on bail.
Per contra, A.G.A has submitted that the Special Court has rejected the bail application of the appellant giving valid reasons. The appellant was named in the first information report. His further submission is that the charge sheet has been filed against the appellant after collecting sufficient evidence against him. The appellant is associated with the PFI organization which is involved in terrorist activities in the country and is trying to create unrest in the country by spreading caste and religious animosity. The bank statement of the accused appellant, Firoz Khan, Ashad Badruddin would establish a huge money transaction in the bank accounts. The appellant has criminal history in two more cases. The bail application of the accused appellant was rejected by the Special Court on the basis of sufficient grounds as ample evidence is there against the appellant, hence the appeal should be dismissed.
“Having heard counsel for parties and upon perusal of the records it transpires that though initially the first information report came to be lodged against four accused persons including the present appellant, but, the charge sheet has already been filed. The co-accused, namely, Sidhique Kappan, who has been assigned the lead role has been granted bail the Apex Court vide order dated 09.09.2022. The other co-accused, namely, Alam @ Mohammad Alam, Atikur Rahman, who were also named in the F.I.R, and K.A Rauf Sherif and Mohd Danish @ Tunnu have been granted bail by coordinate Benches of the Court vide orders dated 23.08.2022, 15.03.2023, 7.7.2023 and 7.7.2023. The appellant has been languishing in jail since 05.10.2020.
Considering the aforesaid orders, it transpires that the Apex Court, while granting bail to the co-accused, Sidhique Kappan, has considered the length of custody undergone by the accused- Sidhique Kappan and thereafter the other co-accused persons have been enlarged on bail by a coordinate Bench of the Court. The ground of long custody period is also available to the appellant, who has been in jail since 05.10.2020.
After having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and that the Supreme Court has granted bail to co-accused and other co-accused persons named above have been enlarged on bail by a coordinate Bench of the Court, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, we are of the considered view that the court below has failed to appreciate the material available on record. The order passed by the court below is liable to be set aside”, the Court observed while allowing the appeal.
The Court ordered that,
Consequently, the order dated 06.12.2022 passed by Special Judge, NIA/ATS, Additional District and Sessions Judge, Lucknow in Bail Application, arising out of Case under Sections 153-A, 295-A, 124-A, 120B I.P.C, Sections 17 and 18 of Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 and Sections 65 and 72 of I.T Act, 2000, Police Station Manth, District Mathura is hereby set-aside.
Let the appellant, Masood be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number with the following conditions:-
a) The appellant shall furnish a personal bond and two sureties of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the trial court.
b) The appellant shall furnish to the investigating officer/S.H.O. a cellphone number on which the appellant may be contacted at any time and shall ensure that the number is kept active and switched-on at all times.
c) The appellant shall ordinarily reside at his place of residence and shall inform the investigating officer if he changes his usual place of residence.
d) If the appellant has a passport, he shall surrender the same to the Trial Court and shall not travel out of the country without prior permission of the Trial Court.
e) The appellant shall not contact, nor visit, nor offer any inducement, threat or promise to any of the prosecution witnesses or other persons acquainted with the facts of the case. The appellant shall not tamper with evidence nor otherwise indulge in any act or omission that is unlawful or that would prejudice the proceedings in the pending trial.