Allahabad High Court
Ramashanker And Another vs State Of U.P. And Another on 28 July, 2023
Bench: Krishan Pahal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:151279
Court No. - 72
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 8106 of 2023
Applicant :- Ramashanker And Another
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Abhas Sharma,Rajesh Kumar Sharma
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.
1. List has been revised.
2. Heard Sri Rajesh Kumar Sharma, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Ramesh Chandra Yadav, learned counsel for the informant and Sri Amit Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record.
3. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicants in Case Crime No.0130 of 2023, registered under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 504 and 506 IPC at Police Station- Chaubepur, District Varanasi with a prayer to enlarge them on anticipatory bail.
4. As per prosecution story, the applicants are stated to have sold the land of 884 square feet without any title as he had title for 391.4 square feet only, as such FIR was instituted against them by the informant for having usurped his property and wrongly sold it.
5. Learned counsel for the applicants has stated that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the present case. The matter is trivial and civil in nature. The applicants have acted as a bona fide persons and have sold the property to which they had title. There are no criminal antecedents of the applicants. Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicants to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against them. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicants have also been touched upon at length. The applicants have apprehension of their arrest. Learned counsel for the applicants undertakes that they have co-operated in the investigation and are ready to do so in trial also failing which the State can move appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail.
6. Per contra, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. have vehemently opposed the anticipatory bail application on the ground that the applicants have misused their clout and have sold three times the land they were entitled, as such the matter falls under criminal category also.
7. 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 applicants shall also be taken care of as per the aforesaid judgment of the Apex Court.
8. In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicants is allowed. Let the accused-applicants-Ramashanker and Umashanker be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime (supra) 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 applicants shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;
(ii). 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 or tamper with the evidence;
(iii). that the applicants shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court;
(iv). that in case charge-sheet is submitted the applicants shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial;
(v). that the applicants shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;
(vi). that the applicants 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.
9. It is made clear that observations made hereinabove are exclusively for deciding the instant anticipatory bail application and shall not affect the trial.
(Krishan Pahal, J.)
Order Date :- 28.7.2023
Ravi Kant
