Allowed

Hari Babu Tyagi v. State of U.P. and Anothers

Allahabad HC16 Nov 2022ABAIL/19225/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A bench granted anticipatory bail to an applicant facing allegations of forgery and cheating in a property dispute. The court held that a case for bail was made out without expressing an opinion on the merits of the criminal allegations, subject to specific bond and conditions.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail allowed on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000 with two sureties on conditions of availability for interrogation and cooperation.

Hari Babu Tyagi Vs State of U.P. and Anothers — Property and Title | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 73

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 19225 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Hari Babu Tyagi Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ajay Kumar Pandey,Yogendra Nath Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Dinesh Kumar Tripathi,Siddharth Bagga

¶4

Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the complainant and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶6

The present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 0362 of 2021, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC, P.S. Nauchandi, District Meerut, with the prayer that in the event of arrest, applicant may be released on bail.

¶7

It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and he has an apprehension that he may be arrested in the above-mentioned case, whereas there is no credible evidence against him. It has further been submitted that applicant has no criminal antecedents and that no coercive process has been issued against the applicant so far. According to the prosecution version, the mother of applicant namely Smt. Parmeshwari Devi, has executed a Will in favour of applicant and his four brothers but the applicant in order to grab the residential property, prepared a forged Will dated 14.06.2019 in his favour and showing himself as only son of his mother and on that basis he has also got mutated his name in municipality record. Learned counsel submitted that the allegations made against the applicant, are thoroughly false. In fact the property in question was acquired by applicant's grandmother and his

¶8

two sons, namely, Jagannath Tyagi and Mangal Saine and one daughter and that Jagannath Tyagi was married with Permeshwari Devi, who has six sons including the applicant. Referring to facts of the matter, it was submitted that essentially the matter pertains about partition of ancestral property. The allegations of cheating and forgery, made against the applicant, are thoroughly false. Referring to facts of the matter, it was submitted that there is no credible evidence against the applicant. The applicant undertakes to co-operate during investigation and trial and he would appear as and when required by the investigating agency or Court. It has been stated that in case, the applicant is granted anticipatory bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and will co-operate during investigation and would obey all conditions of bail.

¶9

Learned A.G.A and learned counsel for the complainant have opposed the application for anticipatory bail.

¶10

It may be stated that in case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra, (2011) 1 SCC 694, it has been held by Hon'ble Supreme Court that while deciding anticipatory bail, Court must consider nature and gravity of accusation, antecedent of accused, possibility of accused to flee from justice and that Court must evaluate entire available material against the accused carefully and that the exact role of the accused has also to be taken into consideration.

¶11

In the instant case, considering the settled principles of law regarding anticipatory bail, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, nature of accusation, role of applicant and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on merit of the case, a case for anticipatory bail is made out.

¶12

The anticipatory bail application is allowed.

¶13

In the event of arrest of the applicant- Hari Babu Tyagi in the aforesaid case crime, he shall be released on anticipatory bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the police station concerned/Court below concerned with the following conditions :-

¶14

(i) the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by the police 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 him/her/them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

¶16

(iii) the applicant would co-operate during investigation and trial and would not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶17

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

¶18

Order Date :- 16.11.2022 A. Tripathi

¶19

Digitally signed by AKHILESH TRIPATHI Date: 2022.11.17 10:53:14 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Hari Babu Tyagi v. State of U.P. and Anothers

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hari Babu Tyagi v. State of U.P. and Anothers

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

Garima Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Rahul Vs State of U.P.and Another

Smt. Shanti Devi Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sugendra Vs State of U.P.

Nikhil Raikawar Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Juned Vs State of U.P. and Another