SHAHZAD Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri V.M. Zaidi, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri M.J. Akhtar, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Vibhav Anand Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record.

(2.) The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No.390 of 2021, under Sec. 3/7 of The Essential Commodities Act, Police Station- Sarsawa, District Saharanpur with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.

(3.) Learned Senior Counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant was enlarged on bail by the Sessions Judge, Saharanpur vide order dtd. 28/2/2022, under Ss. 379, 427 IPC, Ss. 15, 16 of The Petroleum and Minerals Pipeline (Acquisition of Users in Land) Act,Sec. 3/4 of the Exclusive Substances Act and 3/4 of The Prevention of Damages to Public Property Act. Learned Senior Counsel has further stated that after investigation, final report has been submitted in the added Ss. 3/7 of Essential Commodities Act. The said Sec. have been added just to frustrate the case of the applicant, so that he may be sent behind the bars. Learned Senior Counsel has further stated that once the applicant has been admitted to bail and there is nothing on record to suggest that he has misused it or he has committed any other offence, then he may be enlarged on bail under the added Sec. under the provisions of 438 Cr.P.C. Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicant to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against him. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicant have also been touched upon at length. Learned counsel for the applicant undertakes that he has co-operated in the investigation and is ready to do so in trial also failing which the State can move appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail.