Allahabad High Court
Jitendra @ Ram Singh vs State Of U.P. on 14 December, 2023
Author: Krishan Pahal
Bench: Krishan Pahal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:236771
Court No. - 72
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 13136 of 2023
Applicant :- Jitendra @ Ram Singh
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Ram Surat Patel
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.
1. List has been revised.
2. Heard Sri Ram Surat Patel, learned counsel for the applicant 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 applicant in Case Crime No.303 of 2023, registered under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B I.P.C. at Police Station- Kotwali Kalpi, District- Jalaun with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.
4. As per prosecution story, the applicant alongwith other co-accused persons is stated to have duped the informant of 1.1 crore of which Rs.95 lakh was transferred through RTGS and Rs.15 lakh was given in cash.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that he has been falsely implicated in this case. Learned counsel has stated that the said oral agreement to sale was entered into between the informant and co-accused persons Sandeep Singh and Naman. The applicant has nothing to do with the said offence. The applicant has simply been shown to have accompanied the co-accused persons Sandeep Singh and Naman. Learned counsel has stated that the role of the applicant is at different footing to co-accused persons Sandeep Singh and Naman. The criminal history of one case assigned to the applicant stands explained vide supplementary affidavit dated 6.12.2023. In the said case, the closure report has been filed and notice to the informant has been sent, as such he is not wanted in it.
6. 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 has stated that 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. The case of the applicant stands distinguished to co-accused persons Sandeep Singh and Naman.
9. 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.
10. In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed. Let the accused-applicant- Jitendra @ Ram Singh 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 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.
11. 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 :- 14.12.2023/ Vikas
[Krishan Pahal, J.]
