Allowed

Vinay Chaudhary v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC27 May 2022ABAIL/2088/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted anticipatory bail to the applicant in a criminal case involving forgery and cheating, relying on the view that he was falsely implicated and grounded his decision on Apex Court precedents.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted subject to furnishing personal bond and sureties, and complying with specific conditions regarding investigation and travel.

Vinay Chaudhary Vs State of U.P. — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 72

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 2088 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Vinay Chaudhary Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rajan Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Atul Tej Kulshrestha,Manoj Kumar Yadav

¶4

Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.

¶5

Learned counsel for the applicant has filed supplementary rejoinder affidavit today, which is taken on record.

¶6

Heard Shri Rajan Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State, Shri Atul Tej Kulshrestha, learned counsel for the first informant and perused the material on record.

¶7

The instant Anticipatory Bail Application has been filed with a prayer to grant an anticipatory bail to the applicant, namely, Vinay Chaudhary in Case Crime No. 826 of 2021, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B, 504, 506, IPC, Police Station - Kankerkheda, District - Meerut till the conclusion of trial, after rejecting anticipatory bail application of the applicant by Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 3, Meerut vide order dated 8.2.2022.

¶8

The submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. It is further submitted that as per allegation of first information report, named co-accused Usha executed a registered gift deed on the basis of a Power of Attorney dated 18.4.2004 on 31.12.2019 in favour of coaccused Mahesh Pal. The said Power of Attorney is forged and fabricated. It is further submitted that one civil suit being Original Suit No. 301 of 2021, Smt. Usha Vs. Smt. Saorj Bala is pending in the court of Civil Judge (Senior Division), Meerut. One another civil suit being Original Suit No. 439 of 2021, Mahesh Pal Vs. Smt. Saroj Bala and others is also pending in the court of Civil Judge (Junior Division) Hawali, Meerut, which have been filed to declare sale deeds dated 30.11.2016 & 13.4.2021 null and void. Civil litigation is pending between the parties. It is further submitted that the applicant is son of coaccused Mahesh Pal. There is no allegation against the applicant to prepare the alleged forged and fabricated Power of Attorney. It is further submitted that the applicant is marginal

¶9

witness of gift deed dated 31.12.2019, which has been executed in favour of his father. The applicant is not beneficiary of any type. The applicant is no more required for custodial interrogation. The applicant has no criminal history and he has not undergone any imprisonment after conviction by any court of law in relation to any cognizable offence previously. It is further contended that the applicant is ready to participate in the investigation. The applicant was granted interim anticipatory bail by this Court on 16.3.2022.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the first informant have vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the applicant. Learned counsel for the first informant submits that the applicant is real son of co-accused Mahesh Pal and he is actual beneficiary in the present matter.

¶11

It is settled position of law that the anticipatory bail being an extraordinary privilege should be granted only in exceptional cases. Parameters for grant of anticipatory bail in a serious offence are required to be satisfied, where the Court is prima facie of the view that the applicant has falsely roped in the crime and would not misuse his liberty.

¶12

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC Online SC 98, ground for grant of anticipatory bail is made out.

¶13

In case of arrest, the applicant, Vinay Chaudhary is directed to be enlarged on anticipatory bail in above case crime number till the conclusion of trial, on his furnishing personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- and two sureties each of like amount before the Station House Officer of Police Station/Court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶14

(i) The applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by the police officer as and when required, if investigation is in progress;

¶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 such person from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

¶16

(iii) The applicant shall not leave the country 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. concerned/Court concerned;

¶17

(iv) The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by the applicant along-with a self attested identity proof of the said person (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number to which the said Aadhar Card is linked ;

¶18

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

¶19

The Investigating Officer will continue with the investigation, if it is in progress and will not be affected by this order.

¶20

A copy of this order shall also be produced before the S.P/S.S.P concerned by the applicants, within a week, if the investigation is still in progress, who shall ensure compliance of this order.

¶21

With the aforesaid directions, the present Anticipatory Bail Application is allowed.

¶22

Order Date :- 27.5.2022 T. Sinha

¶23

Digitally signed by TRIPTI SINHA Date: 2022.06.01 16:18:00 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Vinay Chaudhary v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vinay Chaudhary 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sipahi Lal Vs State of U.P.

Shivam Nagar Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Smt. Meena Chauhan Vs State of U.P.

Amit Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Kamlesh Singh Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Santosh Vs State of U.P.