Allowed¶12

Smt. Ramjeet @ Ramshree v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC19 Jan 2023ABAIL/11829/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad High Court allowed anticipatory bail (S. 438 Cr.P.C.) on 19.1.2023 to a 72-year-old illiterate woman applicant in Case Crime No. 116 of 2017 (Ss. 420/467/468/471 IPC, P.S. Vijaygarh, Aligarh) concerning a sale deed executed by impersonation by her son Mahesh; charge sheet filed, civil suit pending; release on personal bond with two sureties, conditional on cooperation with trial failing which the order is auto-vacated.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted to Smt. Ramjeet @ Ramshree during pendency of trial, on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned/S.H.O. in case of arrest; order to be automatically vacated/cancelled if the applicant does not cooperate with the trial. ¶12

Smt. Ramjeet @ Ramshree Vs State of U.P. and Another — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2023)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶12

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant, arraigned in Case Crime No. 116 of 2017 under sections 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC (sale deed by impersonation), is entitled to anticipatory bail under section 438 Cr.P.C. during pendency of trial.

¶6

Court's answer

Considering the facts that the applicant is an illiterate lady aged about 72 years, underwent vasectomy operation in 1991, land was allotted in favour of her son and transferred in her favour, though the informant resides in the same village, the applicant is entitled to be released on anticipatory bail during pendency of trial; the Court's observations will not affect the merit of the case.

¶11

Ratio / Principle

The applicant shall be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned/S.H.O. in case of arrest.

¶12

Key takeaways

If the applicant does not cooperate with the trial, the anticipatory bail order shall stand automatically vacated or cancelled.ratio¶13

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Anticipatory bail under S. 438 Cr.P.C. granted (Subhash Chandra Sharma, J., 19.1.2023) to Smt. Ramjeet @ Ramshree, an illiterate lady aged about 72 years, in Case Crime No. 116 of 2017 under sections 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC, P.S. Vijaygarh, District Aligarh, arising from a sale deed of agricultural land allegedly executed by her son Mahesh in connivance with Registrar Office staff by impersonation, with mutation effected in 2016 and F.I.R. lodged in 2017; charge sheet filed, civil suit pending. The Court noted the applicant had undergone vasectomy in 1991, land stood allotted to her son with her consent and was transferred to her, and allowed anticipatory bail during pendency of trial, clarifying its observations would not affect the merits. Bail is on a personal bond with two sureties in the like amount, and stands automatically vacated/cancelled if the applicant fails to cooperate with the trial.

¶1

Court No. - 80

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 11829 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Smt. Ramjeet @ Ramshree Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Shruti Malviya Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record.

¶6

This anticipatory bail application (under section 438 Cr.P.C.) has been moved seeking bail in Case No. 710 of 2019 arising out of Case Crime No. 116 of 2017, under sections 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC, Police Station- Vijaygarh, District- Aligarh.

¶7

Facts in brief are that agricultural land relating to Khsara Nos. 14/2/3 area 0.069 hectare and 120 area 0.3920 hectare was owned by the informant regarding which a sale deed was executed in favour of present applicant by her son Mahesh in connivance with officers of Registrar Office by impersonation of other persons at the time of execution of sale deed. Mutation was also affected in the year 2016 in favour of this applicant. F.I.R. was lodged in the year 2017.

¶8

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that she is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. In this case, this applicant was wife of Kuwar Pal and had undergone the operation of vasectomy in the year 1991, thereafter the aforesaid land was allotted in favour of Naresh Singh son of the applicant with her consent. Now dispute arose between the brothers that was the reason Mahesh @ Naresh transferred the land in favour of this applicant. Further submitted that in the same village informant Naresh Singh son of Kuwar Pal also resides whose mother is Sakuntala Devi. This applicant went under the process of vasectomy operation in the year 1991 as a result the land in dispute was allotted in favour of her son after her approval and this land was transferred by her son Naresh @ Mahesh in favour of this applicant. There is nothing on record that mother of the informant Sakuntala Devi also undergone the process of vasectomy operation and land was allotted in favour of her son. It is also submitted that the civil suit have already been filed before the learned civil court which is still pending. This applicant is illiterate lady aged about 72 years and is not in a position to move freely on account of illness. Lastly, it is

¶9

submitted that after investigation charge sheet has been submitted against her. The applicant is under apprehension of imminent arrest. In case, she is released on bail, she would not misuse the liberty of bail and would cooperate with the trial.

¶10

Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail.

¶11

Consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for parties and perusal of record, it appears that the applicant is illiterate lady aged about 72 years and was undergone vasectomy operation in the year 1991 and land was allotted in favour of her son and that land has been transferred in her favour, though the informant also resides in the same village, the applicant is entitled to be released on anticipatory bail during pendency of trial but the observation of this Court will not affect the merit of the case.

¶12

Let the applicant- Smt. Ramjeet @ Ramshree shall be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned/ S.H.O. in case of arrest.

¶13

In case, applicant does not cooperate with trial, this order shall be deemed to be automatically vacated or cancelled.

¶14

Order Date :- 19.1.2023 A. Singh

¶15

Digitally signed by :- ANURAG SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Smt. Ramjeet @ Ramshree v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Ramjeet @ Ramshree v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sunil Kumar Sharma Vs State of U.P.

Amit Sharma Vs State of U.P.and Another

Mohammad Suhel and 5 Others Vs State of U.P.

Maya Devi Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Shiv Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Nadeem Vs State of U.P. and Another