Allahabad High Court
Modh. Faizan Alias Veeru vs State Of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home ... on 25 August, 2023
Bench: Subhash Vidyarthi
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC-LKO:57113
Court No. - 16
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 1178 of 2023
Applicant :- Modh. Faizan Alias Veeru
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Gov. Civil Sectt Lko And 3 Others
Counsel for Applicant :- Raghvendra P. Singh,Ajay Pratap Singh,Satyendra Prakash Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Saubhagya Mishra
Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.
1. The applicant was granted interim anticipatory bail by means of the following order dated 18.05.2023:-
"The present bail application under Section 438 Cr.PC. has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in case crime No.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.
It is alleged in the prosecution case that the applicant received Rs. 7,97,000/- in his account from the complainant in lieu of providing job either in the UP Revenue Department or in U.P. Agriculture Department, however, even after paying the money, a fake appointment letter was given on the whatsapp number of the complainant allegedly by the applicant.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant and the complainant are related to each other. Money was given by the complainant for the purpose of investment to the applicant. It was a pure business transaction. The applicant had already returned some money to the complainant, details of which are mentioned in para 5 of the bail application. He is also ready to return the rest amount i.e. Rs. 6,77,000/-. It is further submitted that the dispute is primary civil in nature.
Learned counsel for the applicant undertakes that the applicant shall cooperate in the trial.
Issue notice to respondent No. 2.
Learned Addl. Government Advocate prays for and is allowed three weeks time to file counter affidavit.
List on 14.07.2023 on which date the applicant shall file a settlement agreement entered between the applicant and the complainant.
On due consideration to the argument advanced as well as perusal of the record and the fact that the offences are triable by magistrate; he has no criminal history; undertaking has been given by him in para 22 to settle the matter and also considering 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 applicant under Section 438 Cr.P.C.
Till the next date of listing, it is provided that in the event of arrest, the applicant shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-
(1) The applicant shall cooperate in the trial and he will not influence the witnesses.
(2) The accused-applicant will remain present on each and every date fixed by the trial court.
(3) The applicant shall not leave India without previous permission of the Court."
2. Learned counsel for the informant had prayed for and was granted a week's time for filing a counter affidavit by means of an order dated 04.08.2023 but no counter affidavit has been filed by him.
3. The State has also not filed any counter affidavit. 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.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant has informed that the applicant has already furnished bail bonds in furtherance of the aforesaid interim order.
5. In view of the aforesaid circumstances, the interim order dated 18.05.2023 is hereby made absolute and the application is allowed in terms of the aforesaid order.
Order Date :- 25.8.2023
Pradeep/-
