The Allahabad High Court has rejected the anticipatory bail application of former MP Ateeq Ahmad’s son Ali alias Ali Ahmad in a case of extortion of Rs 5 crore and attempt to murder.
A single bench of Justice Mohd Aslam passed this order while hearing a Criminal Misc Bail application U/S 438 CrPC filed by Ali @ Ali Ahmad.
The anticipatory bail application U/S 438 CrPC has been filed on behalf of the applicant Ali @ Ali Ahmad with a prayer to release him on bail in a case under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 504, 506, 307, 308, 386 and 427 IPC, Police Station Kareli, District Prayagraj in the event of his arrest by police.
The facts of the case are that the informant Zeeshan S/o Mohd Zai has lodged a first information report on 31.12.2021 at 21.18 P.M at Police Station Kareli, District Prayagraj on the basis of written complaint, wherein it is alleged that he is resident of 207, Chakia, Police Station Khuldabad, District Prayagraj.
On 31.12.2021 at 3.45 P.M when he was sitting in his house along with family at Ainuddinpur, then applicant Ali @ Ali Ahmad S/o Ateeq Ahmad, Mohd Asad, Arif alias Kachholi, Sanjay Singh, Imran alias Guddu, Saif alias Mama, Aman, Kullu (Mausera brother of Atiq Ahmad) and 15 other persons arrived at his house in 3-4 four wheeler vehicles, thereupon applicant Ali has put pistol on his skull and stated him to talk his father Ateeq Ahmad, when he refused to talk to his father Atiq Ahmad, he demanded Rs 5 crores as ‘rangdari’ or he will execute sale-deed of some land situate in village Ainuddinpur in the name of his wife and threatened him to kill and his family.
He refused to do so, thereupon all the aforesaid accused persons along with 15 unknown persons have started beating him with rifle, pistol and tamancha and they also beat up his relatives Gufran, Fahad and Ali Zafar and due to which, they sustained injuries in the head, hand, legs and stomach. Thereafter, they were sent hospital for treatment and they demolished their office by JCB of ‘Nate’ and accused applicant Ali @ Ali Ahmad and Asad opened fire by their pistols and anyhow, they saved themselves by taking shelter of wall and when police reached they had fled away from there after extending threat to kill the informant.
It is submitted by the counsel for the applicant that the applicant comes from highly reputed political family of State of Uttar Pradesh and his father Ateeq Ahmad was MLA from Allahabad City West Constituency for 5 consecutive terms and one term Member of Parliament from Phulpur Lok Sabha Constituency and uncle of the applicant, Khalid Azim alias Ashraf was the MLA from the Samajwadi Party from Allahabad City of West Constituency.
It is further submitted that the informant is the mausa (khaloo) of the applicant and his father were doing the work of real estate business together.
It is further submitted by the counsel for the applicant that the first informant Mohd Zeeshan is the younger brother of applicant’s Mausa, Imran and the first informant, his brother Kamran and Imran all are engaged in real estate business. The father of the applicant when he was going to jail had given a huge amount of money to the first informant and his brother Imran for investment in his business but after long incarceration of his father, Ateeq Ahmad, and seeing no possibility of his coming out in near future from jail, the informant and his brother turned become dishonest and the present FIR has been maliciously lodged to usurp money & property in connivance with a State Government Minister who wants to secure minority votes for his party in the forthcoming State Assembly Election.
It is further submitted that the informant and his brother Mohd Imran are well known property grabbers and bhu-mafias inasmuch as the first informant Mohd Zeeshan is a scheduled offender and history sheeter of Khuldabad police station and a dozens of criminal cases of serious nature are registered and pending against him. The first informant has been in contact with the high profile local leader of BJP as well as sitting Ministers of the State Government and in a bid to secure Muslims votes for the party in the forthcoming assembly election the first informant has been indirectly pressurizing the applicant’s family due to their political ideology and commitment to secularism did not yield to the pressure, which resulted in lodging of present FIR by the first informant a ploy to further selfish political end.
It is further submitted that the applicant has come to know that the police has obtained non-bailable warrants of the applicant to arrest and confine the applicant in prison and the career of the 19- year-old law Ist year student is at stake.
It is further submitted that due to BJP rule in Centre as well as in the State of Uttar Pradesh, the administration is leaving no stone unturned in oppression of the applicant’s family.
It is further submitted that the applicant filed a Misc Application before the Court concerned on 10.01.2022 stating therein that the police station Kareli has been raiding the house of the applicant since last 10 days and harassing the other family members of the applicant.
It is further submitted that the injuries sustained by the injured persons are all simple in nature. It is further submitted that the injury reports are fabricated.
He has further submitted that no offence under Section 386 IPC is made out in view of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in Issac Isanga Musuniba and others Vs State of Maharashtra and others, (2014)15 SCC357.
Additional Advocate General has submitted that the applicant is named in the first information report. It is further submitted that the case of the co-accused Aashif, Sanjay and Mohd Arif @ Khachauli have no parity in this case because the applicant was leading miscreants. It is further submitted that the anticipatory bail application of Mohd Arif @ Khachauli was rejected.
The Court observed,
The Court has gone through the record and respective ruling filed by the counsel for the parties and from perusal of the first information report, it appears that the accused-applicant is named in the first information report and he was leading accused in the commission of crime and it has been alleged that the accused-applicant has demanded Rs 5 crores from the complainant as Rangdari and has also stated that the complainant has other option to execute sale deed of the land situated in Ainuddinpur, district Prayagraj in the name of his wife. In this occurrence, three persons sustained injuries, fractured and dislocation were found in the shoulder of the complainant.
From perusal of the report of NBW, it appears that accused is avoiding the execution of NBW and in spite of knowledge as stated in the affidavit, he has not surrendered himself before the Court and he is not co-operating in the investigation, therefore, rulings referred does not apply to the present circumstances of the case. From the evidence on record, the accused is avoiding arrest and NBW has been issued and the reward of Rs 50,000 has been announced regarding his arrest. The purpose of granting Anticipatory Bail to the person to co-operate investigation but the conduct of the applicant shows that he is not co-operating in the investigation and non-bailable warrant issued against him and has challenged the order of the award of Rs 25,000 and Rs 50,000 before the High Court.
“In the above circumstances and as per allegations made in the affidavit, the accused- applicant and complainant are close relatives and they are doing business in real estate. There is no evidence available on record, which indicates that the complainant lodged the FIR only to get arrest of the accused/applicant and to humiliate him and this case related to the demand of Rs 5 crore as rangdari, otherwise execute a sale-deed in favour of his wife by the applicant of the land situated in Ainuddinpur, district Prayagraj,” the Court said.
“Keeping in view of the facts and circumstances, the applicant is not co-operating in the investigation and non-bailable warrant could not be executed due to avoidance, this Court finds it is not a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail, so far as release of co accused Sanjay and Imran, it appears that on the ground of plea of alibi and they were present before the Sub Registrar Second, Prayagraj, hence the parity is not made out,” the Court further observed while rejecting the Anticipatory Bail Application.