Allahabad High Court
Jaswinder Singh And Another vs State Of U.P. And Another on 13 April, 2023
Bench: Krishan Pahal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 83
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 224 of 2023
Applicant :- Jaswinder Singh And Another
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Laxmi Kant Shukla
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.
1. List has been revised.
2. Heard Sri Laxmi Kant Shukla, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri R.P. Patel, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record.
3. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicants in Crime No.343 of 2013, registered under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B I.P.C. at Police Station- Dhampur, District Bijnor with a prayer to enlarge them on anticipatory bail.
4. As per prosecution story, the applicants are stated to have taken an amount of Rs.51 lakhs from the informant as a consideration to transfer the land through a registered agreement to sale on 23.10.2006. The applicants are stated to have refused to execute the sale of the said land and are stated to have usurped the said land, thereupon the applicants are stated to have forged a document dated 21.7.2022 citing a compromise between the parties. The FIR was instituted on 12.6.2013 at about 04:30 p.m.
5. Learned counsel for the applicants has stated that the police had taken up the investigation and closure report was filed in court on 26.7.2013. On the protest petition being filed by the informant, the cognizance has been taken and the case has been treated as a complaint case. The applicants have been summoned by the trial Judge vide order dated 7.10.2022. Learned counsel has stated that the applicants have been put to jeopardy by the said order as already a closure report was filed by the police after thorough investigation. The applicants are bona fide persons and have nothing to do with the said offence. Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicants to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against them. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicants have also been touched upon at length. Learned counsel for the applicants undertakes that they have co-operated in the investigation and are ready to do so in trial also failing which the State can move appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail.
6. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the anticipatory bail application but could not dispute the fact that the closure report was filed in the case by the police after thorough investigation.
7. On due consideration to the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the applicants as well as learned A.G.A., taking into consideration the very fact that a closure report was filed in the matter by the police, and considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of the applicants, the applicants are 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 applicants shall also be taken care of as per the aforesaid judgment of the Apex Court.
8. In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicants is allowed. Let the accused-applicants- Jaswinder Singh and Ashok Kumar be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on anticipatory bail till the conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-
(i). that the applicants shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;
(ii). that 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 them from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence;
(iii). that the applicants shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court;
(iv). that in case charge-sheet is submitted the applicants shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial;
(v). that the applicants shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;
(vi). that the applicants shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;
(vii). that in case of breach of any of the above conditions the court below shall have the liberty to cancel the bail.
9. It is made clear that observations made hereinabove are exclusively for deciding the instant anticipatory bail application and shall not affect the trial.
[Krishan Pahal, J.]
Order Date :- 13.4.2023
Vikas
