Supreme Court – Daily Orders
A. Mohamed Yusuf Ansari vs The State Represented By The Inspector … on 21 January, 2025
Author: Rajesh Bindal
Bench: Rajesh Bindal
1
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.352 OF 2025
(@ SLP(CRL.) No. 10817/2023)
A. MOHAMED YUSUF ANSARI APPELLANT(S)
VERSUS
THE STATE REPRESENTED BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE RESPONDENT(S)
WITH
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.353 OF 2025
(@ SLP(Crl.) No.1169 of 2025)
(@ Diary No(s). 36032/2023)
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.354 OF 2025
(@ SLP(Crl) No. 10883/2023)
O R D E R
1. Permission to file SLP(Crl.) Diary No(s). 36032/2023 is
granted.
2. Leave granted.
3. Seeking anticipatory bail for the offences punishable
under Sections 406, 420, 120-B and 506(1) of the Indian
Penal Code, 1860 (for short, ‘the IPC’), the present
appeals have been filed by the appellants in SLP(Crl.)
No.10817/2023 and SLP(Crl.) No. 10883/2023, who are the
Signature Not Verified
father-in-law of the de-facto complainant and the General
Digitally signed by
SWETA BALODI
Date: 2025.01.23
17:25:33 IST
Reason: Manager of the Company.
4. The SLP(Crl.) Diary No(s).36032/2023 has been filed by
2
the de-facto complainant, challenging the anticipatory
bail granted to his mother-in-law.
5. Though arguments have been made at length, what is not in
dispute is that a sum of ₹ 12.5 crores have already been
paid on behalf of the appellant, namely, the father-in-law
of the de-facto complainant to him. We have also been
informed that the remaining amount has not been paid,
which the learned senior counsel appearing for the
appellants submits that they are unable to do so.
6. On a perusal of the complaint and taking note of the
ousting relationship between the parties, we are of the
view that the custodial interrogation of the appellants is
not required.
7. In such view of the matter, we are inclined to set aside
the impugned order and grant anticipatory bail to the
appellants.
8. In such view of the matter, the impugned order stands set
aside and the appellants are granted anticipatory bail,
subject to the condition that the appellants shall
cooperate with the investigation.
9. Accordingly, appeals arising out of SLP(Crl.)
Nos.10817/2023 and 10883/2023 are allowed.
10. Insofar as SLP(Crl.) Diary No(s). 36032/2023 seeking for
cancellation of anticipatory bail is concerned, taking
into consideration the facts and circumstances of the
case, we are not inclined to interfere with the impugned
3
order. However, we make it clear that the observations
made, being prima facie, in nature, will not have any
bearing on the trial.
11. Accordingly, the appeal arising out of SLP(Crl.) Diary
No(s). 36032/2023 is dismissed.
12. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
……………………………………………………J.
[M.M. SUNDRESH]
……………………………………………………J.
[RAJESH BINDAL]
NEW DELHI;
21st JANUARY, 2025
4
ITEM NO.3 COURT NO.9 SECTION II-C
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 10817/2023
[Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 22-08-2023
in CRLOP(MD) No. 7853/2023 passed by the High Court of Judicature
at Madras at Madurai]
A. MOHAMED YUSUF ANSARI Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
THE STATE REPRESENTED BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE Respondent(s)
(IA No. 174547/2023 – EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED
JUDGMENT, IA No. 174548/2023 – EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T., IA No.
178992/2023 – PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL
DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES
WITH
Diary No(s). 36032/2023 (II-C)
(IA No. 179253/2023 – EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED
JUDGMENT, IA No. 179255/2023 – EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T., IA No.
179256/2023 – PERMISSION TO FILE PETITION (SLP/TP/WP/..)
SLP(Crl) No. 10883/2023 (II-C)
(IA No. 175591/2023 – EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED
JUDGMENT, IA No. 175592/2023 – EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.
IA No. 179018/2023 – PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL
DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES, IA No. 178815/2023 – PERMISSION TO FILE
ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES
Date : 21-01-2025 These matters were called on for hearing today.
CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. SUNDRESH
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL
For Petitioner(s) Mr. S Nagamuthu, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Y. Arunagiri, Adv.
Mr. S Ashok Kumar, Adv.
Mr. P. Soma Sundaram, AOR
Mr. Raghunatha Sethupathy B, AOR
Ms. Pariksha, Adv.
Mr. S. Sabari Bala Pandian, Adv.
Mr. Shreehare J, Adv.
Mr. A Velan , AOR
5
For Respondent(s) Mr. P.S. Patwalia, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Jayant Muthalraj, Sr. Adv.
Mr. A Velan, AOR
Mr. Siddhartha Iyer, Adv.
Ms. Navpreet Kaur, Adv.
Mr. Nilay Rai, Adv.
Mr. Prince Singh, Adv.
Ms. Deveshi Chand, Adv.
Mr. Amit Anand Tiwari, Sr. A.A.G.
Mr. Sabarish Subramanian, AOR
Ms. Devyani Gupta, Adv.
Mr. Vishnu Unnikrishnan, Adv.
Ms. Saushria Havelia, Adv.
Mr. Danish Saifi, Adv.
Mr. K N Basha, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Y Arunagiri, Adv.
Mr. S Ashok Kumar, Adv.
Mr. P. Soma Sundaram, AOR
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
SLP(Crl.) No.10817/2023 and SLP(Crl.) No.10883/2023:
Leave granted.
The relevant portion of the order reads as under:-
‘In such view of the matter, the impugned
order stands set aside and the appellants are
granted anticipatory bail, subject to the
condition that the appellants shall cooperate
with the investigation’The appeals are allowed in terms of the signed order.
Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
SLP(Crl.) Diary No(s). 36032/2023:
Permission to file Special Leave Petition is granted.
Leave granted.
The appeal is dismissed in terms of the signed order.
Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
(SWETA BALODI) (POONAM VAID) AR-CUM-PS ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
(Signed order is placed on the file)
[ad_1]
Source link