Allahabad High Court
Raju Yadav vs State Of U.P. And Another on 22 December, 2023
Author: Alok Mathur
Bench: Alok Mathur
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:242734
Court No. - 73
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 13320 of 2023
Applicant :- Raju Yadav
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Chandra Prakash Misra,Prakash Sharma
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J.
1. Heard Sri Prakash Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
2. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No. 0599 of 2022, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 458, 471 I.P.C. Police Station - Cantt, District - Varanasi, with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail. Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. It is submitted that as per allegations levelled in the first information report the applicant has colluded with the other co-accused in creating forged "close relative certificate", according to which other co-accused namely Sachin Yadav, Bechan Yadav and Sechan Yadav are closely related to Ram Kali Devi who is grand mother of complainant. In the first information report it is only stated that applicant has participated in creation of the said forged document. It is submitted that neither in the FIR nor subsequently it has come forth as to what was the role which has been attributed to the applicant with regard to manufacture of forged certificate. It is submitted that allegations levelled in the FIR are vague and false in as much as the "close relative certificate" has been relied upon by the revenue authorities and mutation proceedings have culminated relying upon the said certificate and therefore prima-facie the said certificate is not forged. It is further submitted that perusal of said certificate would indicate that the applicant is neither beneficiary of the said certificate nor it has come either in the FIR or subsequently any role of applicant in creation of said forged certificate.
4. 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.
5. 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.
6. 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.
7. In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed. Let the accused-applicant- Raju Yadav be released forthwith in Case Crime No. 0599 of 2022, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 458, 471 I.P.C. Police Station - Cantt, District - Varanasi, 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.
8. 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 :- 22.12.2023/A. Verma
(Alok Mathur, J.)
