Allowed

Bhanu Prakash Vishnoi v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC5 May 2023ABAIL/1517/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this anticipatory bail application, the court granted bail to the applicant under Sections 419, 420, and 406 IPC. The applicant alleged false implication and that the matter was of civil nature. The court referred to Sushila Aggarwal and allowed bail on personal bond with conditions.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted on personal bond with two sureties subject to conditions regarding appearance, non-tampering, and non-interference with witnesses.

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

¶1

Court No. - 83

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 1517 of 2023

¶3

Applicant :- Bhanu Prakash Vishnoi Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Vijay Singh Sengar,Ajay Singh Sengar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶5

Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record. Heard Sri Vijay Singh Sengar, learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri V.K.S. Parmar, learned A.G.A. for the State and also perused the record.

¶6

The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in F.I.R./Case Crime No. 247 of 2018, under Sections 419, 420, 406 IPC, Police Station Auraiya, District Auraiya, with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.

¶7

As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have sold a plot o 148.698 square metres to the informant without title on 17.8.2009. The informant came to know of the said forgery when he went to take the possession of the said plot.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant is maliciously being prosecuted in the present case due to ulterior motive and has the apprehension of his arrest. The applicant has nothing to do with the said offence as alleged by the prosecution. Learned counsel has further stated that the applicant is the bonafide seller of the said plot. The said two previous sale deeds of the applicant and the other persons have been filed with the supplementary affidavit. It is next stated that the matter is of civil nature and has been converted into criminal one.

¶9

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. It is further submitted that the applicant has no criminal antecedents. In case, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed, he will not misuse the liberty and shall cooperate with trial.

¶10

On the other hand, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant and also the fact that the applicant has no criminal history.

¶11

On due consideration to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of " Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC online SC 98 ", the applicant is entitled to be granted anticipatory bail in this case.

¶12

Without expressing any opinion upon ultimate merits of the case either ways which may adversely affect the trial of the case, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed .

¶13

In the event of arrest of the applicant, Bhanu Prakash Vishnoi involved in the aforesaid case crime number, shall be released on anticipatory bail till the conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Presiding Officer/Court Concerned, with the conditions that:-

¶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; 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;

¶18

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.

¶19

It is made clear that observations made in granting anticipatory bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.

¶20

(Justice Krishan Pahal)

¶21

Order Date :- 5.5.2023 Shalini

¶22

Digitally signed by :- SHALINI JAISWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Bhanu Prakash Vishnoi v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bhanu Prakash Vishnoi 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nathani Alias Pappu Vs State of U.P.

Mukeem and Another Vs State of U.P.

Pradeep Kumar Gupta Vs State of U.P.

Kailash Narayan Tiwari and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. Mohan Swaroop

Sriram Vs State of U.P.

Madan Singh Vs State of U.P.