Allahabad High Court
Khemraj Gupta vs State Of U.P. And 2 Others on 6 May, 2024
Author: Krishan Pahal
Bench: Krishan Pahal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:80998
Court No. - 76
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 4510 of 2024
Applicant :- Khemraj Gupta
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others
Counsel for Applicant :- Dhiraj Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.
1. List has been revised.
2. Heard Sri Dhiraj Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Deepak Kumar Singh, 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 applicant in Case Crime No.664 of 2022, registered under Sections 419, 420, 406 I.P.C. at Police Station- Kotwali, District- Fatehpur with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.
4. As per prosecution story, the applicant and other co-accused persons who happened to be Director in the company are stated to have duped several persons to the tune of Rs.24,02,620/- as several persons had invested heavy amount with the company.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that he has been falsely implicated in this case. The applicant has been wrongly mentioned as Director in the company, in fact, he was an employee being the Manager in it and has nothing to do with the said offence. The informant himself was an agent of the company. Learned counsel has placed much reliance on Annexure-8 filed with anticipatory bail application, whereby it is mentioned that applicant was the Manager in the company of the co-accused persons.
6. Learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that in all three FIRs of similar nature have been instituted against the applicant and in one case he has been granted interim protection vide order dated 25.1.2019 passed in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No.1931 of 2019 and in another case instituted at Jabalpur, Madhya Pradesh the applicant is on bail. In support of this submission, learned counsel has placed much reliance upon the judgment of Prabhakar Tewari Vs. State of U.P. and another, 2020 (11) SCC 648, wherein the Supreme Court has observed that pendency of several criminal cases against an accused itself cannot be a basis for refusal of bail, if otherwise his case of bail is made out.
7. 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. The applicant has apprehension of his arrest. Learned counsel has stated that the applicant undertakes that he has co-operated in the investigation and is ready to do so in trial also failing which the State can move appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail.
8. 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 applicant.
9. On due consideration to the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. and considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of the applicant, the applicant 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 applicant shall also be taken care of as per the aforesaid judgment of the Supreme Court.
10. In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed. Let the accused-applicant- Khemraj Gupta 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 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 the previous permission of the court;
(iv). that in case charge-sheet is submitted 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;
(vii). that in case of breach of any of the above conditions the court concerned shall have the liberty to cancel the bail.
11. 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 :- 6.5.2024
Vikas
(Justice Krishan Pahal)
