Allahabad High Court
Pritish Bhawal vs State Of U.P. on 2 May, 2024
Author: Krishan Pahal
Bench: Krishan Pahal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:78694
Court No. - 76
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 4098 of 2024
Applicant :- Pritish Bhawal
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Syed Imran Ibrahim
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.
1. List has been revised.
2. Heard Sri Syed Imran Ibrahim, learned counsel for the applicant and Ms. Ifra Islam, learned A.G.A. for the State and also perused the record.
3. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in F.I.R./Case Crime No. 62 of 2022, under Sections 406, 419, 420, 504, 506 of IPC, Police Station - Luxa, District - Varanasi, with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.
4. As per prosecution story, the applicant who is stated to be the agent of Q-Net Company of America which used to sell several products across the country, is stated to have entered into an agreement with the informant for making him sub-agent of the said company and had taken Rs.8 lakhs through RTGS and executed a fake agreement with him thereby duping him of his hard earned money.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant is maliciously being prosecuted in the present case due to ulterior motive and has apprehension of his arrest. He has nothing to do with the said offence as alleged by the prosecution. Learned counsel has further stated that the applicant himself supplied material i.e. TRIPSAVR GIGA + TRIPSAVR MEGA + TRIPSAVR VOYAGE worth $10266 USD to the informant and the said amount is more than Rs.8 lakhs (in Indian rupees) which were given to the applicant by the informant. It is further stated that the informant has falsely been implicated the applicant in the present case. The final report (charge-sheet) has been submitted against him u/s 406, 420, 504, 506 of IPC on 28.07.2023, as such, there is no allegation of having forged any document whatsoever.
6. Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicant to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against him. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicant have also been touched upon at length. It is further submitted that the applicant has no criminal history. In case, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed, he will not misuse the liberty and shall cooperate with trial.
7. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant and also the fact that the applicant has no criminal history.
8. Considering the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, nature of accusations and antecedents of the applicant, the applicant is liable to be enlarged on anticipatory bail in view of the law laid down by the 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 Supreme Court.
9. Without expressing any opinion upon ultimate merits of the case either ways which may adversely affect the trial of the case, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed.
10. In the event of arrest of the applicant, Pritish Bhawal, involved in the aforesaid case crime number, shall be released on anticipatory bail till the conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Presiding Officer/Court Concerned, with the conditions that:-
i. that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;
ii. that 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 to any police officer or tamper with the evidence;
iii. that the applicant shall not leave India without previous permission of the court;
iv. that the applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial;
v. that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;
vi. that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;
11. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court concerned shall have the liberty to cancel the bail granted to the applicant.
12. It is made clear that observations made in granting anticipatory bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.
Order Date:- 2.5.2024
Siddhant
(Justice Krishan Pahal)
