Allahabad High Court
Anil Kumar And Another vs State Of U.P. on 1 May, 2024
Author: Krishan Pahal
Bench: Krishan Pahal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:77554
Court No. - 76
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 4373 of 2024
Applicant :- Anil Kumar And Another
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Brajesh Kumar Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.
1. List has been revised.
2. Heard Sri Brajesh Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri S.P. Pandey, 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 No.52133 of 2023 arising out of Case Crime No.10 of 2023 registered under Sections 406, 504 and 506 IPC at Police Station- Nagla Khangar, District Firozabad with a prayer to enlarge them on anticipatory bail.
4. As per prosecution story, the applicants are stated to have taken an amount of Rs.8,30,000/- from the informant on 22.7.2020 and subsequently Rs.7,33,000/- taken on 30.11.2021 for purchasing a car in the name of the informant. The applicants neither purchased the said car nor returned back the amount given to them.
5. Learned counsel for the applicants has stated that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the present case. The FIR is delayed by more than one year and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. The allegations are vague. There is no evidence whatsoever of having transferred a single penny to the accounts of any of the accused persons. Learned counsel has further stated that the statement of the informant was recorded by the Investigating Officer, in which he has stated that he had given Rs.7.5 lakhs to the applicants only. The said material contradiction in the statement of the informant to the FIR is fatal to the prosecution story. Learned counsel has also stated that the final report (charge-sheet) has been submitted on 5.8.2023.
6. 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. There are no criminal antecedents of the applicants. 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.
7. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the anticipatory bail application but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicants.
8. 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 theSupreme Court.
9. In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicants is allowed. Let the accused-applicants-Anil Kumar and Smt. Rashmi 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 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;
(ii). that the applicants shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court;
(iii). that the applicants shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;
(iv). that the applicants shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;
(v). 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.
Order Date :- 1.5.2024
Ravi Kant
(Justice Krishan Pahal)
