Allahabad High Court
Balkishan Agarwal And Another vs State Of U.P. And Another on 31 January, 2023
Bench: Manju Rani Chauhan
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 77
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 10861 of 2022
Applicant :- Balkishan Agarwal And Another
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Arvind Agrawal
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
In Re: Criminal Misc. Correction Application No.3 of 2023.
Heard Mr. Arvind Agrawal, learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State.
Learned counsel for the applicants submits that due to inadvertent mistake, the present correction application has been filed for seeking correction in the order dated 03.01.2023, whereas he seeks modification in the order dated 03.01.2023. Therefore, he submits that the present application be treated as modification application.
Learned counsel for the applicants further submits that in the order dated 03.01.2023, some paragraphs have been required to be deleted and modified accordingly.
Prayer made for is bona fide. Accordingly, the same is allowed.
Order dated 03.01.2023 is recalled and in place of the following order shall be read:-
"Heard Mr. Arvind Agrawal, learned counsel for the applicants, Mr. Pankaj Srivastava, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
The present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Complaint Case No.3239 of 2019 (Bal Kishan Agarwal and others Vs. State of U.P. and others), under Sections 420, 504, 506 I.P.C., P.S. North, District-Firozabad, with the prayer that in the event of arrest, applicants may be released on bail.
A complaint has been lodged with the allegations that one Pappu Lal Jha had taken some money on behalf of applicants for selling property of the applicants.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicants are innocent and they have an apprehension that they may be arrested in the above-mentioned case, whereas there is no credible evidence against them. The entire fraud has been done by Pappu Lal Jha. The applicants have not entered into any agreement to sale nor the applicants have received any amount as alleged in the complaint. Pappu Lal Jha was the person who has contacted the complainant on behalf of applicants taking advantage of their old age and ailments suffered by them. The applicants undertake to co-operate during proceedings before the Court below and trial and they would appear as and when required by the Court. It has been stated that in case, the applicants are granted anticipatory bail, they shall not misuse the liberty of bail and will co-operate during proceedings before the Court below and would obey all conditions of bail.
Learned A.G.A. for the State has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the applicants. They have submitted that in view of the seriousness of the allegations made against the applicants, they are not entitled to grant of anticipatory bail. The apprehension of the applicants are not founded on any material on record. Only on the basis of imaginary fear, anticipatory bail cannot be granted.
On due consideration to the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the applicants as well as learned A.G.A. and considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of the applicants, the applicants are 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.
In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicants is allowed.
Let the accused-applicants:-Balkishan Agarwal and Raghuveer Kumar be released forthwith in the aforesaid complaint case 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 trial court concerned with the following conditions:-
1. The applicants shall not leave India during the currency of trial without prior permission from the concerned trial Court.
2. The applicants shall surrender his passport, if any, to the concerned trial Court forthwith. Their passport will remain in custody of the concerned trial Court.
3. That the applicants 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;
4. The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence and the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law to ensure presence of the applicants.
5. In case, the applicants misuse the liberty of bail, the trial Court concerned may take appropriate action in accordance with law and judgment of Apex Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal and others v. State (NCT of Delhi) and another, (2020) 5 SCC 1.
6. The applicants shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court default of this condition is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and proceed against them in accordance with law."
This order shall form part of the earlier order dated 03.01.2023.
With the aforesaid directions, this correction/modification application stands disposed of finally.
Order Date :- 31.1.2023
Rahul.
