Allahabad High Court
Ram Kumar And Another vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. ... on 27 February, 2023
Bench: Karunesh Singh Pawar
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 12
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 504 of 2023
Applicant :- Ram Kumar and Shiv Kumar
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.
Counsel for Applicant :- Rudra Kumar Tiwari
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.
The applicant has moved the present application under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. praying for grant of anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.32 of 2016 under sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 470, 120-B, 471 I.P.C., P.S. Khandasa, district Ayodhya/Faizabad.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State .
Learned A.G.A. has raised a preliminary objection regarding maintainability of the bail application as the applicant No.2 has not filed affidavit in support of this anticipatory bail application. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that he may be permitted to withdraw the application with regard to applicant No.2 with liberty to file afresh.
The application qua applicant No.2 Shiv Kumar is accordingly dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to file afresh.
It is submitted on behalf of the applicant No.1 that the incident is of 1995. The first information report has been registered via application under section 156(3) CrPC in the year 2016. It is alleged in the prosecution case that the land recorded in the name of the deceased Vindhya, father of the complainant has been got recorded in the revenue record in the name of the applicant showing him as his nephew.
It is submitted on behalf of the applicant that no material could be collected by the investigating officer showing that any forgery has been committed by the applicant or the applicant has used any document, knowing it to be forged, to be genuine. This fact is evident from the statement of the Lekhpal which is on record. At the most, if the entire prosecution case is taken as it is, it can be said that an error was committed by Lekhpal while recording name of the applicant in the revenue record. For that, there is a statutory remedy under the revenue law.No offence of forgery or cheating is made out.
Learned counsel for the applicant has no criminal antecedent. Charge sheet has been filed. He undertakes to cooperate in the trial.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer made by applicant's counsel, however, he does not dispute the fact that the charge sheet has been filed and the applicant has no criminal antecedent.
Considering the fact that the offence is alleged to have been committed in the year 1995, the applicant has cooperated in the investigation and he further undertake to cooperate in the trial, and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on anticipatory bail in this case in the light of judgment of Supreme Court in Sushila Aggarwal and others vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and another (2020)5 SCC 1, subject to his cooperation in the trial.
In view of the above. the accused applicant Ram Kumar is directed to surrender before trial court if he is summoned to face trial for offence in question after filing of the charge sheet. The accused applicant shall be released on anticipatory bail by the trial court on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court, with the following conditions.
(i) 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 tamper with the evidence;
(ii) The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court;
(iii)The applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;
(iv)The applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;
(v) In case of breach of any of the above conditions the court below shall have the liberty to cancel the bail;
Any other reasonable restrictions/conditions which the trial court may deem fit and proper can be imposed.
It is made clear that the observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.
In view of the aforesaid, the anticipatory bail application is allowed.
Office is directed to return certified copies annexed with the application to applicants' counsel, as per rules of the court.
Order Date :- 27.2.2023
kkb/
