Allahabad High Court
Anurag Agarwal vs State Of U.P. And Another on 22 December, 2022
Bench: Krishan Pahal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 78
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 13244 of 2022
Applicant :- Anurag Agarwal
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Ram Prakash Dwivedi,Pranshu Dwivedi
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.
Heard Sri Ram Prakash Dwivedi, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri P.K. Srivastava, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record.
The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No.0322 of 2020, registered under Sections 420, 406 and 120-B IPC at Police Station- Hari Parvat, District Agra with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.
This is the second anticipatory bail application. The first one was dismissed for want of prosecution by this Court on 16.09.2022.
As per prosecution story, the applicant and the informant and one Dilip Mittal were the partners in a firm and the informant was absent for a considerable period of time and during the said period, the applicant and co-accused person Dilip Mittal are said to have withdrawn an amount of about Rs.15 lacs to Rs.20 lacs on the basis of bearer cheques in the name of the informant.
Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that he has been falsely implicated in the present case and has nothing to do with the said offence. There is nothing on record to suggest that the applicant has forged the signatures of the informant. The said bearer cheques were in the name of the informant, but the said cheques have been signed by the applicant himself. He has not forged the signatures of any person whatsoever. There is nothing on record to suggest that the said amount of the said cheques has not been withdrawn by the informant. There are no criminal antecedents of the applicant. Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicant to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against him. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicant have also been touched upon at length. Learned counsel for the applicant undertakes that he has co-operated in the investigation and is ready to do so in trial also failing which the State can move appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the anticipatory bail application on the ground that the applicant and co-accused person Dilip Mittal have in all withdrawn an amount of Rs.34,34,000/-, although he could not dispute the fact that there are no criminal antecedents of the applicant.
On due consideration to the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. and considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of the applicant, the applicant is liable to be enlarged on anticipatory bail in view of the judgment of Supreme Court in the case of "Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi), (2020) 5 SCC 1". The future contingencies regarding the anticipatory bail being granted to applicant shall also be taken care of as per the aforesaid judgment of the Apex Court.
In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed. Let the accused-applicant- Anurag Agarwal be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on anticipatory bail till the conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the Police Station concerned/court concerned with the following conditions:-
1. that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;
2. 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 or tamper with the evidence;
3. that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court;
4. that in case charge-sheet is submitted the applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial;
5. that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;
6. that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;
7. that in case of breach of any of the above conditions the court below shall have the liberty to cancel the bail.
It is made clear that observations made hereinabove are exclusively for deciding the instant anticipatory bail application and shall not affect the trial.
Order Date :- 22.12.2022
Ravi Kant
