Allowed

Neeraj@ Neeraj Goswami v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC26 Jul 2022BAIL/8446/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal miscellaneous bail application, the court examined allegations of cheating regarding a real estate transaction. Finding the dispute essentially civil in nature and noting the informant's failure to pay balance consideration, the court granted bail to the applicant.

What did the court decide?

The applicant was released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below, subject to conditions against tampering with evidence,

Neeraj@ Neeraj Goswami Vs State of U.P. — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 79

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8446 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Neeraj@ Neeraj Goswami Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Satya Narayan Yadav,Ayush Mishra,Prabha Shanker Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ujjawal Satsangi

¶4

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶5

1.Heard Sri Prabha Shanker Mishra, the learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Arun Kumar Pandey, the learned Additional Government Advocate and perused the record. Sri Ujjawal Satsangi, Advocate has put in appearance on behalf of the informant but neither he is present to assist the Court nor has any request been made in his behalf for adjournment of the matter.

¶6

2.The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 152 of 2021, under Sections 420, 409, 506 IPC, Police Station Nandgram, District Ghaziabad during pendency of the trial in the Court below.

¶7

3.The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of a first information report lodged by the informant against the applicant and three other persons alleging that she had entered into an agreement to purchase a plot from the aforesaid persons for a total consideration of Rs.40,20,000/-, against which she had paid a sum of Rs. 20,80,000/- but the accused persons did not execute the sale deed and did not return the said money.

¶8

4.In the affidavit filed in support of the bail application, it has been stated that the applicant is innocent and he has not committed any offence and that the applicant's company is still ready to get the sale deed executed in favour of the informant, who is also engaged in the business of sale and purchase of real estate. It has further been stated in the FIR that because of the recession in the real estate and property business, the informant has herself backed out from the deal and she has lodged a false report. It has further been stated in the affidavit that the informant herself has not complied with the conditions of agreement and she has not paid the balance amount of the agreed sale consideration and her allegations are false.

¶9

5.The affidavit contains a categorical undertaking that in case the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty.

¶10

6.Having considered the aforesaid facts and submissions, I am of the view that prima facie the dispute is of a civil nature and even as per the FIR allegation the informant herself has not paid the balance amount of the agreed sale consideration.

¶11

7.Further the applicant has categorically stated that his company is ready to execute the sale deed of the land in question in favour of the informant.

¶12

8.The applicant is languishing in jail since 06.02.2021.

¶13

9.Per contra, the learned Additional Government Advocate has opposed the prayer for grant of bail.

¶14

10.Keeping in view the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, I find it to be a fit case for grant of bail to the applicant in the aforesaid case crime number.

¶15

11.In the light of preceding discussion and without making any observation on the merit of the case, the instant bail application is allowed.

¶16

12.Let the applicant Neeraj@ Neeraj Goswami be released on bail in Case Crime No. 152 of 2021, under Sections 420, 409, 506 IPC, Police Station Nandgram, District Ghaziabad on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below, subject to the following conditions:-

¶17

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶18

(ii) The applicant will not influence any witness.

¶19

(iii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶20

(iv) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make 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 to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶21

13.In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move an application before this Court seeking cancellation of the bail.

¶22

Order Date :- 26.7.2022 Ashish Pd.

¶23

Digitally signed by ASHISH PRASAD Date: 2022.07.29 17:29:48 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Neeraj@ Neeraj Goswami v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Neeraj@ Neeraj Goswami 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jai Kishor Vs State of U.P.

Sohil Vs State of U.P.

Azeem Vs State of U.P.

Raja Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Roxy Vs State of U.P.

Shariq Hussain Vs State of U.P.