Allahabad High Court
Vivek Kumar vs State Of U.P. And Another on 13 September, 2022
Bench: Suresh Kumar Gupta
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 72
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 7346 of 2022
Applicant :- Vivek Kumar
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Narendra Kumar,Pradeep Kumar Maurya
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Mukesh Joshi
Hon'ble Suresh Kumar Gupta,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and learned counsel for the first informant.
The present anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. has been filed for grant of anticipatory bail as the accused-applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Case Crime No.285 of 2022, under sections 420, 406, 506 IPC, Police Station Majhola, District Moradabad.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case just to harass the applicant. The applicant has never committed any offence as alleged in the impugned FIR. The applicant is a government servant and posted as Gateman on Habibwala Railway Station, Bijnor. From perusal of the impugned FIR, no date and time has been mentioned in the FIR. The applicant has never taken any money from the opposite party no.2 for purchase of Truck and Car as alleged in the impugned FIR. The applicant has never cheated the opposite party no.2. In fact the applicant has given money to the opposite party no.2 for purchase of plot and only due to property dispute, the impugned FIR has been lodged levelling false and fabricated allegations. The dispute is purely civil in nature, but has given criminal colour. No offence is made out against the applicant. The applicant is having no previous criminal history and he is ready to cooperate in the investigation.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the applicant and 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 applicant is also named in the impugned FIR and as per version of the FIR, there is a clear cut allegation against the applicant. 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.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and from the perusal of material on record and also taking into consideration the gravity of accusation and there being possibility of their fleeing from justice, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the applicant is not entitled to be released on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant is refused.
However, since this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case, if the applicant appears before the trial court and seeks grant of regular bail, his application would be decided on its own merit and without being influenced by the rejection of the present anticipatory bail application in view of the judgment in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, 2021 SCC Online SC 922.
With the aforesaid observation, the present anticipatory bail application is disposed of.
Order Date :- 13.9.2022
Ajeet
