Allahabad High Court
Raj Kumar Pandey vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. ... on 24 January, 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. - 169 of 2023
Applicant :- Raj Kumar Pandey
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Dept. Civil Sectt. Lko.
Counsel for Applicant :- Gyan Prakash Panday
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.
The present bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in case crime No.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned Additional Government Advocate for the State.
It is alleged in the F.I.R. that on a secret information, Police team arrested four accused, namely Shyam Gupta, Sham Kishore Bajpai, Rizwan and Ankit Srivastava and recovered fourteen stolen cars on their pointing out. The accused in the Police custody have confessed that cars were stolen by them along with their other companions. They also confessed that they use to port engine number and chesis number in the stolen cars with the other accidental cars in order to avoid suspicion.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that name of the applicant has surfaced in the statement of the prosecution witness Deep Narayan Pandey who has stated that he has purchased one car through the applicant as broker. It is submitted that if any engine has been found with chesis number of car purchased by any of the prosecution witness, the seller is responsible therefor. Applicant is mediator who runs a car bazar. The people come to buy and sell old cars on his shop in the name and style "Gonda Car Bazar" at Gonda. Applicant has sold three cars. The papers of those three cars are on record.
He submits that like the applicant, statement of another person Danish who also runs a car bazar has been recorded by the Police in which it was found that he also sold a car to one Satyam Bajpai, however, he has not been made accused.
It is lastly submitted that there is no recovery from the present applicant. Learned counsel undertakes on behalf of the applicant that the applicant shall cooperate in the investigation.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for grant of bail. He submits that the investigation is going on.
Considering the above aspects of the matter, perusal of the record, the undertaking given by applicant's counsel that the applicant shall cooperate in the investigation, the applicant has no criminal antecedent, as also 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.
It is provided that in the event of arrest, the applicant Raj Kumar Pandey shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting officer/I.O./S.H.O. concerned, till filing of police report.
The applicant shall cooperate in the investigation and he will not influence the witnesses. The accused-applicant will remain present as and when the arresting officer /I.O./ S.H.O. concerned call (s) for investigation/interrogation. The applicant shall not leave India without previous permission of the Court.
In case of default, it would be open for the investigating agency to move application for vacation of this interim protection.
The application is allowed.
Order Date :- 24.1.2023
kkb/
