Dr.Narendra Singh vs State Of U.P.
2021 Latest Caselaw 2504 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

                Reserved On:- 08.02.2021 
 
   Delivered On:- 18.02.2021 
 
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 1577 of 2021
 

 
Applicant :- Dr.Narendra Singh
 
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Swetashwa Agarwal, Subir Lal
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A., Anil Kumar Tiwari, Atul Kumar Tiwari
 
Hon'ble Siddharth, J.

1. Heard Sri Swetashwa Agarwal, learned counsel for the applicant; Sri Anil Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A for the State.

2. The instant Anticipatory Bail Application has been filed with a prayer to grant an anticipatory bail to the applicant, namely, Dr. Narendra Singh, Case Crime No. 137 of 2019, under Section- 420 IPC, Police Station- Medical College, District- Meerut.

3. Prior notice of this bail application was served in the office of Government Advocate and as per Chapter XVIII, Rule 18 of the Allahabad High Court Rules and as per direction dated 20.11.2020 of this Court in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 Cr.P.C. No. 8072 of 2020, Govind Mishra @ Chhotu Versus State of U.P., hence, this anticipatory bail application is being heard. Grant of further time to the learned A.G.A as per Section 438 (3) Cr.P.C. (U.P. Amendment) is not required.

4. The allegations in the First Information Report are that the informant was married to Semendra Singh, son of applicant, on 06.12.2008 and 2 children were born to the couple. The informant was living at Greater Noida and her late husband was employed on the post of Associate Professor since August, 2010 in Sharda University. On account of mental torture and abetment of the applicant and his wife, Smt. Kusum Lata, her husband committed suicide on 10.12.2014, when she was not in the house. The applicant is father-in-law of informant and in order dispossess her and her children from the property, he lodged a Case Crime No.1308/2014 under Section 306 of I.P.C. on 23.12.2014, alleging that the informant is responsible for the suicide of his son. After investigation, final report was submitted in that case before the Court. Further investigation is going on. She obtained information regarding 19 Life Insurance Policies of her husband from Life Insurance Corporation and she has been informed on 01.08.2018 that the applicant and his wife, Kusum Lata, have got a death certificate dated 04.02.2015 prepared from Nagar Nigam, Meerut and on its basis an amount of Rs. 52,54,484/- was transferred in their accounts by Life Insurance Corporation towards the Insurance Claim of deceased. In the death certificate, the place of death of the deceased has been shown as Jawahar Quarters, Meerut, when the deceased committed suicide at Grater Noida. The cause of death has been shown as illness in the death certificate aforesaid. In collusion with the employees of the Nagar Nigam, Meerut, the death certificate was prepared fraudulently and on its basis the Life Insurance Corporation illegally transferred the policy amount to other persons, applicant and his wife, than the nominee, hence the First Information Report was lodged.

5. Learned Counsel for the applicant submits that the Investigating Officer found that the death certificate issued by the Nagar Nigam was not used by the Life Insurance Corporation, therefore Sections- 467, 468, 471, 120-B of I.P.C. were dropped and the charge sheet has been submitted against the applicant only under Section 420 of I.P.C., whereon cognizance has been taken by the Magistrate on 17.10.2019. The present First Information Report has been lodged by way of counter blast to the First Information Report dated 23.12.2014 lodged by the applicant against the informant under Section 306 of I.P.C. He has further submitted that the allegation in the First Information Report that only to deprive the informant and her children from their share in the property of her husband, the case under Section 306 of I.P.C., was lodged, is incorrect. After death of the husband of the informant, 11.5 bighas of agricultural land has been transferred in the name of the informant and her 2 minor children. She is also living in the house where she used to reside with her deceased husband at Greater Noida. In the 15 policies, out of 18 taken by the deceased husband of the informant, the applicant was nominee and in the remaining 3 policies, the informant was nominee and therefore, the policy amount of 15 policies have been transferred to the account of applicant. The cremation of the deceased took placed at Meerut and therefore the death certificate has been issued by the Nagar Nigam, Meerut. The applicant has enquired from Life Insurance Corporation, Meerut under Right to Information Act and the cause of death of deceased was mentioned as suicide and not illness as alleged.

6. The applicant has been falsely implicated in this case, he is being maliciously prosecuted by his daughter-in-law. He is the retired Professor of Chemistry Department, Chaudhary Charan Singh University, Meerut. He is aged about 78 years and his health condition is precarious.

7. The Counsel for the informant has vehemently opposed the anticipatory bail application and has submitted that the offence alleged against the applicant in the First Information Report are fully made out. Charge Sheet has already been submitted against the applicant and he has also filed an Application under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., challenging the charge sheet before this Court.

8. Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the applicant. He has submitted that in view of the seriousness of the allegations made against the applicant, he is not entitled to grant of anticipatory bail. The apprehension of the applicant is not founded on any material on record. Only on the basis of imaginary fear anticipatory bail cannot be granted.

9. After considering rival submission, this Court finds that the applicant has been implicated by his daughter-in-law. He has also lost his son, if the informant has lost her husband. The applicant is quite old. Charge sheet has been submitted against him and there does not appears any reason for the applicant to not to cooperate with the Trial. Part of the allegations made in the First Information Report regarding the offences under Section 467, 468 and 471 of I.P.C., have not been found to be correct by the Investigating Officer of the Police. The Investigating Officer has recorded finding in Parcha No.VII that the death certificate issued by the Nagar Nigam, Meerut has not been used by the applicant anywhere. Therefore the applicant has been implicated for offence under Section 420 of I.P.C., only. The offence under Section 420 of I.P.C. is non-bailable but triable by Magistrate of the Ist Class.

10. In the event of arrest, the applicant shall be released on anticipatory bail. Let the applicant involved in the aforesaid crime be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court concerned with the following conditions:-

1. The applicant shall not leave the country during the currency of trial without prior permission from the concerned trial Court.

2. The applicant shall surrender his passport, if any, to the concerned Court forthwith. His passport will remain in custody of the concerned Court.

3. That the applicant shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

4. The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence and the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law to ensure presence of the applicant.

5. In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail, the Court concerned may take appropriate action in accordance with law and judgment of Apex Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi)- 2020 SCC Online SC 98.

6. The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court default of this condition is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

7. The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.

8. The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.

Order date:- 18.02.2021

Rohit