Allahabad High Court
Mukesh Kumar Gautam vs State Of U.P. And Another on 29 November, 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. - 11618 of 2022
Applicant :- Mukesh Kumar Gautam
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Saurabh Pandey
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.
Heard Sri Saurabh Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri R.P. Patel, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and perused the records.
The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No. 35 of 2022, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B IPC at Police Station- Mahihan, District Mirzapur, with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.
As per prosecution story, named person Satyendra Kumar is said to have filed forged documents with respect to the marriage of one Poonam daughter of Ram Dularey to get the money from the Chief Minister Collective Marriage Scheme.
Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that he is not named in the FIR. He has been falsely implicated in the present case. The forgery, if any, has been committed by named accused person Satyendra Kumar and the applicant is a bonafide person. He has simply forwarded the documents to other officer. The applicant has nothing to do with the said offence and he is not beneficiary. He has next submitted that the money has not been transferred to Poonam. There are no criminal antecedents of the applicant. The case of the applicant is at a different footing to the named accused persons. 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. In case, the anticipatory bail application of the applicants is allowed, they will not misuse the liberty and shall cooperate in the investigation/trial.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the anticipatory bail application but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for 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- Mukesh Kumar 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 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 :- 29.11.2022
v.k.updh.
