Allowed

Deenanath Patel v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC26 Oct 2023ABAIL/11146/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed an anticipatory bail application filed by Deenanath Patel in a cheating case. The court granted bail subject to various conditions, including appearance in court, non-tampering of evidence, and non-flouting of any other condition mentioned in the judgment.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted in crime No.371 of 2018 on personal and two sureties bond with specific conditions.

Deenanath Patel Vs State of U.P. and Another — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:204021

¶2

Court No. - 72

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 11146 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Deenanath Patel Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Uday Narain Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶6

List has been revised.

¶7

Heard Sri Uday Narain Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Anit Kumar Shukla, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record.

¶8

The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No.371 of 2018, registered under Section 406 IPC at Police Station- Ali Nagar, District Chandauli with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.

¶9

As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have usurped an amount of Rs.1,06,000/- of the informant on the pretext that a demat account shall be opened in his name and he shall be given Rs.4,000/- per month.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. Learned counsel has further stated that Rs.31,000/- have been given to the informant, but subsequent to it, no money has been remitted to his account. The applicant is ready to return the amount due towards him. 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. There are no criminal antecedents of the applicant. The applicant has apprehension of his arrest. Learned counsel for the applicant undertakes that he has cooperated in the investigation and is ready to do so in trial also failing which the State can move appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail.

¶11

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the anticipatory bail application but unable to dispute the

¶12

submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶13

On due consideration to the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. and considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of the applicant, the applicant is liable to be enlarged on anticipatory bail in view of the judgment of Supreme Court in the case of "Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi), (2020) 5 SCC 1" . The future contingencies regarding the anticipatory bail being granted to applicant shall also be taken care of as per the aforesaid judgment of the Apex Court.

¶14

In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed. Let the accused-applicant- Deenanath Patel be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on anticipatory bail till the conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶15

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

¶16

(ii). 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;

¶17

(iii). that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court;

¶18

(iv). that in case charge-sheet is submitted the applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial;

¶19

(v). that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;

¶20

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

¶21

(vii). that in case of breach of any of the above conditions the court concerned shall have the liberty to cancel the bail.

¶22

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

¶23

Order Date :- 26.10.2023 Ravi Kant

¶24

(Krishan Pahal, J.)

¶25

Digitally signed by :- RAVI KANT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Deenanath Patel v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Deenanath Patel 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

Deshraj Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Babu Khan Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shivam Gupta Vs State of U.P.

Abhishek Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Ankit Vs State of U.P.

Sabir Vs State of U.P.