Allahabad High Court
Praveen Sharma vs State Of U.P. And Another on 11 August, 2023
Bench: Gajendra Kumar
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:163006
Court No. - 91
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 28499 of 2023
Applicant :- Praveen Sharma
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Amit Kumar Srivastava
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Gajendra Kumar,J.
1. Learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State.
2. The present application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant with the prayer to modify the impugned order dated 26.07.2023 passed by Sessions Judge, Meerut in Bail Application No.5606 of 2023, while removing the condition no.7 in the order dated 26.07.2023, arising out of Case Crime No.110 of 2023, under Sections 420, 406, 506 IPC, Police Station Civil Lines, District Meerut.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that there has been lodged an F.I.R. against the applicant bearing Case Crime No.110 of 2023, under Sections 420, 406, 506 IPC regarding the dispute as to the landed property, which is purely of civil nature. Further submission is that earlier a Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No.9696 of 2023 was filed which, vide order dated 26.06.2023, observing that as the offences are triable up-to seven years so mandatory compliance of Sections 41 & 41-A Cr.P.C. is to be made, was disposed off accordingly by the Division Bench of this Court. Thereafter the applicant moved an application for anticipatory bail before the Sessions Judge Meerut and Sessions Judge, Meerut has been pleased to grant interim bail during the pendency of the anticipatory bail vide order dated 26.07.2023. The main grievance of the learned counsel for the applicant is that in that order, condition no.7 is arbitrary as it has been given an option to the Investigating Officer to move an application for police custody and then the applicant has to surrender accordingly.
4. In support of his submission, learned counsel for the applicant has placed reliance upon the judgement of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi) (SC) 2020 (111) 593 in which, the relevant paragraph no.78(g) is reads as under:-
"(g) The observations in Sibbia regarding "limited custody" or "deemed custody" to facilitate the requirements of the investigative authority, would be sufficient for the purpose of fulfilling the provisions of Section 27, in the event of recovery of an article, or discovery of a fact, which is relatable to a statement made during such event (i.e. deemed custody). In such event, there is no question (or necessity) of asking the accused to separately surrender and seek regular bail. Sibbia (supra) had observed that "if and when the occasion arises, it may be possible for the prosecution to claim the benefit of Section 27 of the Evidence Act in regard to a discovery of facts made in pursuance of information supplied by a person released on bail by invoking the principle stated by this Court in State of U.P. v Deoman Upadhyaya."
5. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that as the case is arising out of the civil dispute so there is no need for police custody and also placed reliance upon the judgement of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sumit Subhaschandra Gangwal and another Vs. The State of Maharashtra and another, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 373, in which the relevant paragraph no.5 reads as under:-
"However, as stated hereinabove, we, prima facie, find that the petitioner's custodial interrogation would not be necessary for the offences alleged with"
6. Keeping in view the entire facts and circumstances of the case and the manner in which proceeding carried out by the trial court, it is apparent that the case is of civil nature. There is a dispute regarding the sale deed, in which some advance money has been made and first informant has accepted that some amount has been taken back. There is no occasion for seeking police remand in the given facts and circumstances of the case.
7. In the facts and circumstances of the case and also keeping in view of the proposition of law laid down in the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court, the condition no.7 is liable to be deleted and same is accordingly deleted.
8. With the aforesaid observations, the application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. is disposed off.
Order Date :- 11.8.2023//Sanjeet
