MUKHTAR ANSARI Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) S. K. Phaujdar, J. Heard the learned counsel for the applicant. The learned A. G. A. opposed the prayer for bail vehemently indicating how an under-trial prisoner had been unlawfully using a cel lular phone and that too in the name a fake person.

(2.) PERUSED the order of the Court below in which it has been indicated that several cases were pending against the present applicant and several calls were made by the applicant through the cellular phone while in Jail. It was submitted by the learned A. G. A. that the case is a sensitive one. A case becomes sensitive, in my view, for the law point involved in it and not for involved in the case. The al legations are that the applicant Mukhtar Ansari, while in jail, had been using a cellular phone which was in the name of a fake person and an undertrial had no right to use any phone, far less a cellular phone. The offences alleged are of cheating, abet ment of the same and of conspiracy.

(3.) THERE is a submission on behalf of the applicant that he was ordered to be released on bail in another case and the present case was initiated after he was directed to be released in "that earlier case. This aspect is not of much consequence as the F. I. R. is silent as to who is the person deceived and as to what damage had been caused to him. While considering a bail application a court of law is to be guided by the allegations and interpretation of law and not on the personality of the person detained famous or notorious.