Allahabad High Court
Ravi Kushwaha vs State Of U.P. Thru Prin.Secy. Home ... on 25 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. - 5080 of 2021
Applicant :- Ravi Kushwaha
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru Prin.Secy. Home Lko. And Anr.
Counsel for Applicant :- Dinesh Chandra Shukla
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Anand Kumar Srivastava,Manmohan Singh,Praveen Kumar Tripathi
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.306 of 2020, under Sections 471, 468, 467, 504, 420 and 406 I.P.C., Police Station Vibhuti Khand, District Lucknow
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State who ha opposed the bail prayer. None appears for the complainant even in revised list.
Gist of the issue involved in the present anticipatory bail application is given in order dated 2.12.2021, which is extracted below :
"Heard Shri Dinesh Chandra Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant as well as Shri Ajay Kumar Singh Tomar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
Earlier in the morning when this case was taken, learned counsels for opposite party no.2 namely Anand Kumar Srivastava and Praveen Kumar Tripathi were not present and thus, to accommodate them the case was directed to be taken up after lunch and the Bench Secretary was directed to inform. However, on being informed, Shri Anand Kumar Srivastava had stated that he is not having any instructions from his client.
The present application has been moved by the accused-applicant- Ravi Kushwaha, in Case Crime No. 306 of 2020, under Sections 471, 468, 467, 504, 420 and 406 I.P.C., Police Station Vibhuti Khand, District Lucknow with the prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.
Learned counsel for the applicant while pressing the anticipatory bail application submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case and he has not committed any offence as claimed by the prosecution.
It is further submitted that the informant had actually agreed to do the business of catering and also taken one hotel in the name of Surya on lease and for that purpose the amount which has been mentioned in the First Information Report was remitted to the firm in the name of M/s 3 AR Solutions owned by the applicant and out of Rs. 15,95,000/- remitted in the company of the applicant, the applicant had returned about Rs. 8,14,000/- to the informant and since the remaining amount has been invested in the business, the same could not be immediately taken out and the applicant is ready to settle the accounts with the informant and her husband.
It is further submitted that so far as the story pertaining to Rs. 16,00,000/- given in cash to the applicant is concerned, the same is afterthought and has been crafted only for the purpose of applying pressure on the applicant. The applicant is ready to settle the accounts with the complainant/informant, but they are not ready for the same and are adopting coercive measures and tactics against the applicant.
It is also submitted that the informant has also arrayed wife of the applicant namely Asha Kushwaha as the accused, however, on being approached a co-ordinate Bench of this court had granted interim protection from arrest to her. It is next submitted that the applicant is a respectable citizen of locality and he is ready to settle the accounts with the informant/complainant, but the attitude of the complainant/informant is apparent from the fact that even the counsels engaged by her are not appearing before the court and the police under the pressure of the informant/opposite party no.2 is making all out efforts to apprehend/arrest. The applicant despite there being no clinching evidence/material available against him and the instant matter is purely on civil nature.
Learned A.G.A. on the other hand submits that the applicant is the main accused and the whole chunk of money has been deposited in the company owned by him. Therefore, he could not claim parity with the co-accused Smt. Asha Kushwaha.
Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record, it is evident that the dispute between the parties appears to be of settlement of accounts. Despite being given an opportunity, the counsels engaged by the opposite party no.2 did not appear before this court. However, to do complete and substantial justice between the parties, an opportunity is again being provided to the opposite party no.2 and in this regard a fresh notice is required to be issued to opposite party no.2 in order to inform him that the counsels engaged by her are not appearing before the court.
Thus, issue notice to opposite party no.2 again returnable within three weeks.
Steps in this regard may be taken by learned counsel for the applicant within 03 working days from today.
List this case on 22nd December, 2021.
Keeping in view all the facts and circumstances of the case, in the considered opinion of this court, having regard to the material/evidence available against the applicant, the applicant may be provided interim protection from his arrest in this case.
Thus, it is provided that till the next date of listing in the event of arrest of the applicant namely Ravi Kushwaha involved in the above noted case, he shall be released forthwith on anticipatory bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the Police Station concerned/ Investigating Officer with the following conditions:-
(1) The applicant shall make himself available for interrogation or for discovery of any fact by a police officer as and when required;
(2) 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 them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;
(3) The applicant shall not leave the District concerned without the previous permission of the trial court."
Considering the fact that the first information report has been lodged after delay of five months, the applicant has no criminal antecedent, charge sheet has been filed, and the dispute primarily seems to be between business partners relating to settlement of account, the applicant has cooperated in the investigation and further undertakes 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 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 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 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.
Order Date :- 25.1.2023
kkb/
