Allahabad High Court
Deepak Shakya @ Deepak Kumar vs State Of U.P. And Another on 15 May, 2024
Author: Krishan Pahal
Bench: Krishan Pahal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:87265
Court No. - 76
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 4557 of 2024
Applicant :- Deepak Shakya @ Deepak Kumar
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Ghan Shyam Das,Sr. Advocate
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.
1. List has been revised.
2. Heard Sri Ghan Shyam Das, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Pranshu 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 applicant in Case Crime No.219 of 2022 registered under Sections 420, 467, 468 and 471 IPC at Police Station- Bhogaon, District Mainpuri with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.
4. As per prosecution story, the applicant in collusion with the deed writer is stated to have executed a sale deed in favour of the informant by impersonation. It is alleged in the FIR that the said property does not belong to the applicant and he does not know hot it has been transferred to other person.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. The FIR No.532 of 2018 was instituted against the applicant and other accused persons of having illegally got transferred the land belonging to Gram Sabha. The applicant was serving as a household help of the informant who happens to be the son of local Legislative Council Member. The applicant was taken to the office of Registrar stating that he has to act as a marginal witness but instead the said sale deed has been executed.
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. There are no criminal antecedents of the applicant. The applicant has apprehension of his arrest. Learned counsel for 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.
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 applicant.
8. 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 theSupreme Court.
9. In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed. Let the accused-applicant- Deepak Shakya @ Deepak Kumar be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on anticipatory bail till the conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal 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.
10. 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 :- 15.5.2024
Ravi Kant
(Justice Krishan Pahal)
