Allahabad High Court
Vinod Kumar And Another vs State Of U.P. And Another on 14 June, 2021
Bench: Vivek Agarwal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 1
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 10481 of 2021
Applicant :- Vinod Kumar And Another
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Rama Shanker Mishra
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Vivek Agarwal,J.
Heard Sri Rama Shanker Mishra, learned counsel for applicants-Vinod Kumar and Subhash Singh and Sri Vinod Kant, learned AAG assisted by Sri Nagendra Srivastava, learned AGA for the State.
This application has been filed on behalf of the applicants, on account of registration of Case Crime No. 0021 of 2021 at Police Station-Tilhar, District-Shahjahanpur under Section 420 IPC.
Learned counsel for applicants submits that applicants are aggrieved of order dated 22.03.2021 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Shahjahanpur in Anticipatory Bail Application No. 1014 of 2021. It is submitted that allegation on the applicants, who are respectively purchaser and a witness to the sale deed, is to the effect that they had entered into a sale transaction in relation to a property and a sale deed was registered in favour of the applicant no. 1. It is submitted that later on Case Crime No. 0021 of 2021 was registered on 12.01.2021 by the wife of the seller namely, Pushpa Devi w/o Neeraj Kumar alleging that her husband Neeraj Kumar is a mentally challenged person. Applicant-Vinod Kumar, who is brother-in-law of the complainant, had mislead Neeraj Kumar and had obtained a sale deed for the land situated at Village-Udara, Pargana-Nigohi, Tehsil-Tilhar, Jila-Shahjahanpur without giving any consideration. Allegation is that no information regarding the mental status of the seller Neeraj Kumar was furnished and under such facts and circumstances, FIR came to be lodged. Learned trial court treating it to be a case of financial fraud and relying on the judgment of Supreme Court in case of P. Chidambaram vs. Directorate of Enforcement passed in Criminal Appeal No. 1340 of 2019 decided on September 05, 2019, rejected the anticipatory bail application.
Learned counsel for applicants submits that it is a matter of family dispute and the remedy, if any, is to file a suit for cancellation of the sale deed, inasmuch as, if complainant is able to prove that Neeraj Kumar was not having sound mental health at the time of the transaction, then whole transaction can be declared as null and void. But instead of resorting to civil litigation, an attempt has been made to convert civil litigation into a criminal case.
Sri Vinod Kant, in his turn, submits that it is a serious economic crime and investigation is going on. If any indulgence is shown at this stage, then that will jeopardize the investigation.
After hearing learned counsel for the parties and going through the available record, it is true that civil remedy is available to the complainant to seek cancellation of the sale deed. Mental status of the seller namely, Neeraj Kumar is a relative fact and that is to be determined by the appropriate court by taking evidence as to whether mental condition of Neeraj Kumar was fit to execute a sale deed at the relevant point of time or not. This dispute having civil connotations has several other dimensions which can only be deciphered during investigation.
There are no chances of the applicants, who are father, son and related to the complainant being elder brother of Neeraj Kumar to flee away from the proceedings.
Looking to the facts of the case, taking into consideration the gravity and nature of accusation and there being no possibility of their fleeing from process of justice delivery, this Court is of the view that applicants are entitled for anticipatory bail.
Accordingly, let applicants namely, Vinod Kumar and Subhash Singh implicated in the aforesaid case be released on anticipatory bail on their furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the Police Station concerned with the following conditions:-
(i) The applicants shall make themself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required, by approaching said police officer within 30 days from today.
(ii) The applicants 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 or tamper with the evidence.
(iii) The applicants shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court.
(iv) The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.
(v) 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.
(vi) In default of any of the conditions mentioned above or in case it is found that applicants have obtained this order concealing any material facts, the investigating officers shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicants.
In above terms, case is disposed off.
Order Date :- 14.6.2021
Vikram/-
