Allowed

Saeed v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC10 Feb 2023ABAIL/13567/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court allowed an anticipatory bail application filed by Saeed in a cheating case involving the sale of property shares over a power of attorney. The court noted the civil nature of the dispute and granted bail subject to standard conditions, including availability for interrogation and no tampering with evidence.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted to release the applicant till submission of the chargesheet on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties and complying with specified conditions.

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

¶1

Court No. - 85

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 13567 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Saeed Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- A.Z.Khan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Mrs. Jyotsna Sharma,J.

¶5

Heard Sri A.Z.Khan, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State assisted by Sri Vinay Kumar Singh, Briefholder and perused the record.

¶6

The instant anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 0312 of 2022, under Sections 420, 406, 504, 506 IPC , Police Station Rampur Maniharan, District Saharanpur.

¶7

As per the allegations in the FIR lodged on the basis of an application moved under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C., the applicant sold more than his share on the basis of power of attorney of his brother Shamim showing that he had full right of selling the same, though he had already sold a portion thereof.

¶8

It is contended on behalf of the applicant that he actually sold only his share which he succeeded on the basis of a Will deed executed by his father in his favour; it is also pointed out that the first informant filed a revenue case under Sections 34/35 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 with regard to subject matter, however, the first informant did not pursue the same; it is said that the controversy between the two sides is civil in nature which has been attempted to be converted into a criminal one.

¶9

The application for anticipatory bail is opposed by learned AGA for the State.

¶10

In case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra, (2011) 1 SCC 694, it has been held by Hon'ble Supreme Court that while deciding anticipatory bail, Court must consider nature and gravity of accusation, antecedent of accused, possibility of accused to flee from justice and that Court must evaluate entire available material against the accused carefully and that the exact role of the accused has also to be taken into

¶11

consideration.

¶12

In the instant case, I considered submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, nature of accusation, role of applicant and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, In my view, a case for anticipatory bail is made out.

¶13

Let the applicant, Saeed involved in the aforesaid case crime number be released on anticipatory bail till submission of chargesheet on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each of the same amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the conditions as below:-

¶14

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

¶15

(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;

¶16

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

¶17

(iv) that the applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial;

¶18

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

¶19

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

¶20

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.

¶21

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.

¶22

Order Date :- 10.2.2023 #Vikram/-

¶23

Digitally signed by :- VIKRAM GUPTA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Saeed v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Saeed 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

Shailendri Devi Vs State of U.P. and Another

Kishori Lal Sharma Vs State of U.P.

Hakeem Azad Jarrah Alias Azad Vs State of U.P.

Mohammad Ovaish Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Anees Vs State of U.P. and Another

Jishan Ali Vs State of U.P.