Allahabad High Court
Vikas And 2 Others vs State Of U.P. And Another on 9 October, 2023
Bench: Shekhar Kumar Yadav
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:193890
Court No. - 71
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 10575 of 2023
Applicant :- Vikas And 2 Others
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Shantanu
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned Additional Government Advocate for the State.
2. This anticipatory bail application (under section 438 Cr.P.C.) has been moved seeking bail in Complaint Case No. 559 of 2020, under Section 452, 323, 504, 506, 354, 354-B IPC, P.S. Ramala, District Baghpat during pendency of trial.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that complainant of the present case is said to have executed a registered agreement to sale dated 3.09.2014 in favour of the wife of the applicant no. 1 and when the same has not been executed, wife of applicant no. 1 filed a Sit for specific performance of the agreemnt to sale, which is still pending. It is further submitted that the complainant also filed a suit seeking cancellation of the said agreement to sale, which is also stated to be pending. It is further submitted that during the pendency of the aforesaid litigation, complainant is said to have executed a sale deed. Thereafter, wife of the applicant no. 1 is said to have filed a complaint under Sections 420, 504, 506,323,120-B,354-B IPC in which the court below summoned the opposite party/complainant of the present case vide order dated 12.03.2018. It is further submitted that opposite party filed criminal revision challenging the summoning order which has been rejected vide order dated 4.5.2019, against which opposite party no. 2 filed a petition under Article 227 of the Constitution in which he got an ex-parte interim order dated 16.7.2019 and the same is still pending. It is further submitted that as a counter blast to the complaint filed by the wife of the applicant no. 1 opposite party no. 2 is said to have filed a complaint against the applicants under Sections 420, 452, 354, 354-B,323,324,120-B, 504, 506 IPC in which applicants have been summoned vide order dated 9.4.2018. Thereafter, applicant filed revision before the court below, which has been allowed and the matter was remanded back to pass a fresh order. Thereafter, opposite party no. 2 is said to have challenged the summoning order 9.4.2018 as well as revisional order dated 4.5.2019 in a petition under Article 227 of the Constitution, which came to be dismissed vide order dated 30.07.2019. Thereafter, applicants have been summoned vide order dated 13.02.2020 and also filed anticipatory bail which came to be dismissed, hence the present anticipatory bail application.
4. It is submitted that the entire allegation against the applicants is false and concocted. There is no credible evidence against them. The applicants undertakes 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. It is further submitted that the matter relates to purely civil dispute and has been given the colour of criminality just to harass the applicants.
5. Learned A.G.A. for the State has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the applicants.
6. 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 is 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.
7. In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicants is allowed.
8. Let the accused-applicants Vikas, Pravesh and Sunil 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 their 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 Vs 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."
9. With the aforesaid directions, this application stands disposed of finally.
Order Date :- 9.10.2023
RavindraKSingh
