Single Judge allowed anticipatory bail to the applicant. The court held that a case for bail was made out considering the applicant's role and the nature of the SARFAESI Act proceedings involved.
Forthcoming release on anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties subject to specified conditions.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 85
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 12274 of 2022 Applicant :- Sanjeev Gautam Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Rishabh Kesarwani,Atipriya Gautam,Devesh Mishra,Sr. Advocate Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Mrs. Jyotsna Sharma,J.
that the co-accused the then Bank Manager namely Shail Varshney @ Shaily Varshney has been granted anticipatory bail by a coordinate Bench of this Court in Criminal Misc Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 Cr.P.C. No. 12273 of 2022 vide order dated 05.01.2023.
(i) that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;
(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;
(iii) that the applicant shall not leave India without previous permission of the court;
(iv) that the applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial;
(v) that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;
(vi) that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted.
9. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall have the liberty to cancel the bail granted to the applicant.
10. It is made clear that observations made herein shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion at any stage of the case based on material before him.
Order Date :- 20.1.2023 #Vikram/-
Digitally signed by :- VIKRAM GUPTA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a case for anticipatory bail is made out for the applicant accused of cheating and forgery in connection with property auction proceedings.
Whether the applicant acted in good faith and bonafide manner without criminal intention in the execution of the sale deed.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of MaharashtraReferred¶10
Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra, (2011) 1 SCC 694 · Who else cites this
6 provisions across 2 enactments
Sanjeev Gautam
State Of U.P.
Jyotsna Sharma
Vikram Gupta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
