Allahabad High Court
Akshay Buddhiraja vs State Of U.P. on 8 April, 2019
Bench: Ram Krishna Gautam
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 49
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 14366 of 2019
Applicant :- Akshay Buddhiraja
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Madan Lal Rai
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ram Krishna Gautam,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Satyender Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the informant as well as learned A.G.A. and perused the record.
By means of this application, the applicant Akshay Buddhiraja, who is involved in Case Crime No. 1752 of 2018, under Sections 420, 464, 467, 468, 471, 120B I.P.C., P.S. Sihani Gate, District Ghaziabad, is seeking enlargement on bail during the trial.
Learned counsel for the applicant argued that F.I.R. of above case crime number under above section was got registered at Police Station Sihani Gate on 30.8.2018 at 16:50 hours, upon the report of Manoj Pal Singh against Surendra Pal Buddhiraja, Akshay Buddhiraja, Arvind Buddhiraja, Smt. Shimal and Ravi, with this contention that Surendra Pal Buddhiraja was well acquainted with informant, showed his willingness to sell house No. KC/C-22, area of 345.65 sq. mtr., which was in the name of Smt. Shimal Buddhiraja, his wife, which power-of-attorny was executed in favour of her husband Surendra Pal Buddhiraja. A copy of that power-of-attorney was given to informant and Akshay Buddhiraja as well as Arvind Buddhiraja brother of Surendra Pal Buddhiraja, ensured about above power-of-attorney on the basis of which agreement to sell was executed on 30.7.2016 in which advance of Rs. 40 lacs was said to be paid to Surendra Pal Buddhiraja, his brother Arvind and his son Akshay, remaining 60 lacs was said to be paid at the time of sale deed subsequently it was came to know that house was under loan and this was fraud whereas Akshay Buddhiraja is of no concern neither he executed alleged power-of-attorney nor alleged agreement to sell nor there is any proof of payment of huge amount of 40 lacs against premium nor it was registered agreement to sell. It was a false implication. Accused applicant is of no criminal antecedents, hence, bail has been prayed for.
Learned counsel for the informant has vehemently opposed the bail application with this contention that huge amount of Rs. 40 lacs has been taken and none are traceable and after enlargment on bail, presence will become impossible nor money would be recoverable, hence, the amount of money got deposited.
Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer for bail.
Neither registered agreement to sell nor documentary proof of payment of Rs. 40 lacs nor power-of-attorney executed in the name of present accused applicant nor he was executor of agreement to sell. Under all above facts and circumstances and without commeting on the merit of case, a case for bail is made out.
Let applicant Akshay Buddhiraja, be released on bail in Case Crime No. 1752 of 2018, under Sections 420, 464, 467, 468, 471, 120B I.P.C., P.S. Sihani Gate, District Ghaziabad, on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:-
(i) The applicant will co-operate with the trail and remain present personally on each and every date fixed after release.
(ii) The applicant will not tamper with the prosecution evidence and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.
(iii) The applicant will not indulge in any unlawful activities.
(iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever.
The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.
Order Date :- 8.4.2019
Kamarjahan
