Allahabad High Court
Guru Prasad Alias Guru Prakash And ... vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. ... on 8 August, 2023
Bench: Subhash Vidyarthi
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC-LKO:53057
Court No. - 16
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 125 of 2023
Applicant :- Guru Prasad Alias Guru Prakash And Another
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Dept. Home Civil Secrett. Lko. And Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Desh Ratan Mishra,Pawan Kumar Misra
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Bipin Kumar Rai
Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.
On 19.01.2023, after hearing the learned counsel for the applicant and the learned A.G.A. this Court had passed the following interim order -
"The present bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in case crime No.165 of 2022 under sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C., P.S. Motiganj, district Gonda.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned Additional Government Advocate for the State.
Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the accused have fraudulently obtained land in Gata Nos. 194/0, 3480, Gata No.196/0.3500 hectare situated at village Birva Babhani, Pargana Tehsil and district Gonda, thus have deprived the informant of the land, who was the sole legal heir of his deceased father.
It is submitted that the first information report has been lodged after 38 years. The applicants' name has been mutated in the revenue records after order order dated 5.10.1974 passed by S.D.O. in case No.305 of 1972 Guru Prakash and others versus Milan. It is submitted that the dispute is purely civil in nature. Applicant No.1 is 72 years old and the applicant No.2 is 63 years of age, having no criminal history.
Learned counsel for the applicant undertakes that the applicants shall cooperate in the investigation.
Issue notice to respondent No.2.
Learned Addl. Government Advocate prays for and is allowed ten days' time to file counter affidavit/seek instructions in the matter.
List on 17.2.2023.
Considering the above aspects of the matter, perusal of the record, the fact that the applicants' name has been mutated in the revenue record consequent to order passed by Sub Divisional Officer, as also the judgment in Sushila Aggarwal and others versus State (NCT of Delhi) and another (2020)5 SCC 1 and without entering into the merit of the case, it would be appropriate to grant interim protection to the applicants under Section 438 Cr.P.C.
Till the next date of listing, it is provided that in the event of arrest, the applicants shall be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting officer/I.O./S.H.O. concerned.
The applicants shall cooperate in the investigation and he will not influence the witnesses. The accused-applicant will remain present as and when the arresting officer /I.O./ S.H.O. concerned call (s) for investigation/interrogation. The applicants shall not leave India without previous permission of the Court.
In case of default, it would be open for the investigating agency to move application for vacation of this interim protection."
The State as also the informant have filed counter affidavits. The applicants have filed rejoinder affidavit to the counter affidavit filed by the State, but nothing has come to light which may persuade this Court to take a view, different from the view taken while passing the aforesaid order, nor the learned A.G.A. has pointed out violation of any of the conditions of interim anticipatory bail committed by the applicant.
In view of the aforesaid circumstances, the interim order dated 19.01.2023 is hereby made absolute and the application is allowed in terms of the aforesaid order.
(Subhash Vidyarthi J.)
Order Date :- 8.8.2023
A.Nigam
