Allahabad High Court
Rajesh Kumar Agarwal vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. ... on 22 November, 2022
Bench: Sanjay Kumar Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 11
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 461 of 2022
Applicant :- Rajesh Kumar Agarwal
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.
Counsel for Applicant :- Lalta Prasad Misra,Prafulla Tiwari
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Jitendra Kumar Mishra,Prahlad Singh,Sooraj Lal
Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Singh,J.
Case called out. Mr. Pankaj Kumar Misra, learned counsel, holding brief of Dr. Lalta Prasad Misra, learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State of U.P. are present but Mr. Jitendra Kumar Mishra, Mr. Prahlad Singh and Mr. Sooraj Lal, learned counsel, who have filed Vakalatnama on behalf of the complainant are not present.
Heard and perused the record.
This Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. has been moved by the applicant after rejecting his anticipatory bail application by the order dated 16.02.2022 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge/P.C. Act-7, Lucknow, seeking Anticipatory Bail in Case Crime No. 594 of 2021, under Sections 406, 409, 504, 506 and 120B IPC, Police Station Vibhuti Khand, District Lucknow.
On 24.03.2022, Coordinate Bench of this Court, while granting interim anticipatory bail to the applicant, has passed following order :-
"Heard Sri Lalta Prasad Misra, learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record.
The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No. 594 of 2021, U/S 406, 409, 504, 506 IPC and 120-B IPC, Police Station Vibhuti Khand, Gomti Nagar, District Lucknow, with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.
As per prosecution story, Rs. 15 lakhs of money was transferred to the account of M/s Sprinkles Energy Private Limited and Rs. 35 lakhs to Rohi Nandan Infra Developer. The applicant and co-accused person, Sanjeev Kumar Tiwari are said to have usurped the said money and neither returned the money nor supplied the liquor, which they were supposed to. It is also alleged in the FIR that the cheques were issued in lieu of the money but they were bounced.
Learned counsel for applicant has stated that this is the case which comes within the purview of Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act and the same has not been agitated by the first informant, rather he is trying to add colour in lodging the present FIR. Learned counsel undertakes that he will cooperate in the investigation failing which the State can move appropriate application for vacation of the interim protection.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant.
Matter requires consideration.
Three weeks' time is granted to learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the first informant to file counter affidavit.
One week's time, thereafter, is granted to learned counsel for the applicant for filing rejoinder affidavit.
On due consideration to the arguments advance 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, as an interim measure, is liable to be enlarged on anticipatory bail in view of the Constitution Bench judgment of Supreme Court in the case of "Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC online SC 98". 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 the event of arrest, the accused-applicant- Rajesh Kumar Agarwal, shall be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on interim anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting officer/investigating officer/S.H.O. concerned on the following conditions:-
(i) the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation as and when required;
(ii) 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; and
(iii) the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court.
List on 22nd April, 2022 in the additional cause list."
It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that till date, no charge-sheet has been submitted in this case. The applicant is cooperating with the investigation and did not misuse the liberty of aforesaid interim anticipatory bail which was granted on 24.03.2022 by the Coordinate Bench of this Court.
Learned AGA for the State does not dispute the aforesaid factual aspect of the matter as argued on behalf of the appellant.
In view of the above, aforesaid interim anticipatory bail order dated 24.03.2022 is made absolute till submission of police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. on the terms and conditions as indicated in the above order dated 24.03.2022.
With the aforesaid observations and directions, the instant anticipatory bail application is allowed.
Order Date :- 22.11.2022
Shubham
