Allahabad High Court
Nafees Alias Sonu vs State Of U.P. on 18 August, 2023
Bench: Krishan Pahal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:166386
Court No. - 72
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 9022 of 2023
Applicant :- Nafees Alias Sonu
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Akhilesh Kumar Tiwari
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.
1. List has been revised.
2. Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record.
3. Heard Sri Akhilesh Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Amit Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record.
4. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No.115 of 2023, registered under Sections 386, 406 and 506 IPC at Police Station- Machhli Shahar, District Jaunpur with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.
5. As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have executed a power of attorney in favour of the informant after taking an amount of Rs.1 lakh from him in lieu of selling a land to him, but subsequently the applicant is stated to have refused to execute the sale deed of the land and even demanded a ransom of Rs.2 lakhs from the informant besides usurping the said Rs.1 lakh transferred to his account.
6. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. The allegations are per se false. The matter is civil in nature as the parties have fallen apart over the consideration for the said sale deed. Learned counsel has further stated that one case has also been instituted against the applicant regarding similar allegations at the behest of the informant. There is no other criminal history of the applicant. 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. The applicant has apprehension of his arrest. Learned counsel for the applicant undertakes that he has co-operated in the investigation and is ready to do so in trial also failing which the State can move appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail.
7. 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.
8. 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.
9. In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed. Let the accused-applicant- Nafees Alias Sonu 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:-
(i). that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;
(ii). 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;
(iii). that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court;
(iv). that in case charge-sheet is submitted the applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial;
(v). that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;
(vi). that the applicant 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 concerned shall have the liberty to cancel the bail.
10. 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 :- 18.8.2023
Ravi Kant
(Krishan Pahal, J.)
