Allowed

Narayan Das Prajapati v. State of U.P.and Another

Allahabad HC6 Dec 2022ABAIL/12285/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge granted anticipatory bail to the applicant in a case involving cheating, forgery, and criminal conspiracy under the IPC. The court relied on the apex court judgment in Sushila Aggarwal without expressing an opinion on the ultimate merits of the case.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted subject to furnishing bond with two sureties and adherence to standard conditions including appearance before court and no tampering with evidence or leaving India.

Narayan Das Prajapati Vs State of… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 78

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 12285 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Narayan Das Prajapati Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Umesh Chandra Prajapati Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Umesh Chandra Prajapati, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Viresh Kumar Gupta, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record.

¶6

The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Complaint Case No. 2188/2199 of 2017, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B, 504, 506 of IPC, Police Station Nawabad, District Jhansi, with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.

¶7

As per prosecution story, the daughter of the applicant Smt. Preeti Devi is stated to have executed a sale-deed in favour of the complainant herein vide sale-deed dated 30.5.2013 without title and is stated to have duped the hard earned money of the complainant to the tune of Rs.8 lakh.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the said statement with respect to execution of the sale-deed is also wrong as the daughter of the applicant had sold the said land vide registered sale-deed dated 4.7.2013. Learned counsel has further stated that the applicant is maliciously being prosecuted in the present case due to ulterior motive. The applicant has nothing to do with the said offence as alleged by the prosecution. No forgery has been committed by the applicant or his daughter either. The documents are genuine as the daughter of the applicant had purchased the said land in the year 2008 and she was the bonafide title holder of the land. The complainant herein is used to filing frivolous complaint against various persons as he has filed another complaint being Complaint No.25 of 2018 before the court of Judicial Magistrate, Garautha, Jhansi with similar allegations. The present complaint case and the said complaint case no. 25 of 2018 are hit by section 300 Cr.P.C. and the applicant has been put to double jeopardy by the complainant. 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

¶9

of the applicant have also been touched upon at length. It is further submitted that the applicant has no criminal antecedents except the above stated two complaint filed by the same complainant. The applicant is not a previous convict. In case, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed, he will not misuse the liberty and shall cooperate with trial.

¶10

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 is not a previous convict.

¶11

On due consideration to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of " Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC online SC 98 ", the applicant is entitled to be granted anticipatory bail in this case.

¶12

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 .

¶13

In the event of arrest of the applicant, Narayan Das Prajapati 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:-

¶14

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

¶15

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;

¶16

that the applicant shall not leave India without previous permission of the court;

¶17

that the applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial;

¶18

that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;

¶19

that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each

¶20

date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;

¶21

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall have the liberty to cancel the bail granted to the applicant.

¶22

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.

¶23

Order Date :- 6.12.2022 Siddhant

¶24

Digitally signed by SIDDHANT SAHU Date: 2022.12.06 13:29:24 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Narayan Das Prajapati v. State of U.P.and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Narayan Das Prajapati v. State of U.P.and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sandeep Mishra Vs State of U.P.

Guljar and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sachin Verma @ Sachin Singh Vs State of U.P.

Salman and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Aamir Vs State of U.P. and Another

Jahangir Vs State of U.P. and Another