Allowed

Tapan Kumar Dutta v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC12 Oct 2022ABAIL/9018/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single bench allowed an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. The Supreme Court precedent Sushila Aggarwal was applied. The court granted bail with standard conditions including personal bond, sureties, and restrictions on leaving India or influencing witnesses.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted on personal bond with two sureties, subject to specific conditions including availability for interrogation and prohibition on leaving India.

Tapan Kumar Dutta Vs State of U.P. — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 78

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 9018 of 2022 Applicant :- Tapan Kumar Dutta Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Abhay Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶3

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶4

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Vibhav Anand Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record.

¶5

The present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Case no. 108360 of 2021, in Case Crime No. 0666 of 2020, under Sections 406, 420 IPC, Police Station- Chakeri, District- Kanpur Nagar, with the prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.

¶6

As per prosecution story, the applicant is said to have sold a plot of 83.61 square metres to the first informant vide registered sale deed on 16.11.2018. At the time of taking up construction at the said plot, it transpired that earlier on, the same land has been sold by the society itself to one Ramkumari W/o Shailendra Singh and they had reached at the plot and got the said construction undertaken by the first informant stopped.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case with a view to cause unnecessary harassment and to victimize him. Learned counsel has stated that the said registered sale deed dated 19.3.2018 has been declared void by the Additional Commissioner Awaas vide order dated 29.10.2020. Learned counsel has next stated that despite the said document which was in the knowledge of the investigating officer, the charge sheet has been filed which cannot be sustained under law. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant has cooperated in the investigation. It is further stated that applicant is co-operating in the trial and is ready to do so in future also. There is no likelihood of the applicant repeating the said offence, if any. 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.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory

¶9

bail but unable to dispute the fact of declaration of the said sale deed dated 19.3.2018 as void and that the applicant has no criminal history.

¶10

On due consideration to the arguments advanced by 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) 5 SCC 1", the applicant is entitled to be released on anticipatory bail in this case.

¶11

In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed . In the event of arrest, let the accusedapplicant Tapan Kumar Dutta released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on bail on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶12

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

¶13

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;

¶14

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

¶15

that in default of any of the conditions mentioned above, the investigating officer shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant;

¶16

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

¶17

that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;

¶18

that in case of breach of any of the above conditions the court below shall have the liberty to cancel the bail.

¶19

It is made clear that observations made hereinabove are exclusively for deciding the instant anticipatory bail application and shall not affect the trial or deciding the regular bail application.

¶20

Order Date :- 12.10.2022\Shalini

¶21

Digitally signed by SHALINI JAISWAL Date: 2022.10.13 11:29:37 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Tapan Kumar Dutta v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tapan Kumar Dutta 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

Kafeel Kuddusi and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Adeel Kuddusi Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shahnawaz and 4 Others Vs State of U.P.

Arshad Khan Vs State of U.P.

Ashish Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ragib Rana Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others