Allowed

Ramgareeb v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC17 Sept 2020ABAIL/4345/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Single Judge granted anticipatory bail to a 76-year-old applicant accused of offences under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, and 471 IPC. The court noted the applicant's age and role as a marginal witness, directing the investigating officer to conclude investigations within three months.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted against arrest in Case Crime No. 28 of 2020 until submission of police report, subject to bond and conditions.

Ramgareeb Vs State of U.P. — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 1

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 4345 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Ramgareeb Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sunil Kumar Verma,Kulashvar Sharma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J.

¶5

Sri Sunil Kumar Verma, learned counsel for the applicant submits that he has filed supplementary affidavit in the Registry of this Court on 28.8.2020, which is not on record.

¶6

Office is directed to trace out the same and place it on record.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant states that he could not file the certified copy of the impugned F.I.R. and prays for exemption. The exemption application is allowed.

¶8

Heard Sri Sunil Kumar Verma, learned counsel for the applicant, Ms. Archana Singh, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State and perused the record.

¶9

It has been contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant who is aged about 76 years, is a marginal witness of the disputed sale deed and so far as criminal history of one case is concerned, on the said case, final report has been submitted and the said fact has been mentioned in para 3 of the supplementary affidavit. The present FIR has been lodged against the applicant just to malign his image in the society.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail.

¶11

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusation and the age of applicant, the applicant is entitled to be released on anticipatory bail in this case.

¶12

In the event of arrest of the applicant Ramgareeb involved in Case Crime No. 28 of 2020, under sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC, P.S. Lalganj, District Mirzapur, he shall be released on anticipatory bail till the submission of police report, if any, under section 173 (2) Cr.P.C. before the competent Court on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House

¶13

Officer of the police station concerned with the following conditions:-

¶14

(i) the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

¶15

(ii) 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 from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

¶16

(iii) the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court and if he has passport, the same shall be deposited by him before the S.S.P./S.P. /Competent Court concerned.

¶17

In default of any of the conditions, the Investigating Officer is at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant.

¶18

The Investigating Officer is directed to conclude the investigation of the present case in accordance with law expeditiously preferably within a period of three months from the date of production of a copy of this order independently without being prejudice by any observation made by this Court while considering and deciding the present anticipatory bail application of the applicant.

¶19

The applicant is directed to produce a copy of this order before the S.S.P/S.P./Competent Court concerned within ten days from today, who shall ensure the compliance of present order.

¶20

The case of the applicant is distinguishable from other coaccused persons.

¶21

The party shall file computer generated copy of order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by it alongwith a self attested identity proof of the said person(s) (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number(s) to which the said Aadhar Card is linked, before the concerned Court/Authority/Official.

¶22

The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of the computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.

¶23

Order Date :- 17.9.2020 Tamang

Ramgareeb v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramgareeb v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Muttalib Vs State of U.P. and 2 Ors.

Ram Gopal @ Gopali Vs State of U.P.

Mohit Sharma Vs State of U.P.

Krishna Vs State of U.P.

Akshay Vs State of U.P.

Arvind and 6 Ors. Vs State of U.P.