Allowed

Mangala Prasad Patel @ Mangala Patel v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC12 May 2023ABAIL/2053/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court granted anticipatory bail to the applicant in a cheating case under Section 438 Cr.P.C., relying on the Apex Court decision in Sushila Aggarwal. Bail was granted subject to personal bond and specific conditions including availability for interrogation and non-inducement of witnesses.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail allowed to the applicant on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in like amount, subject to specific conditions.

Mangala Prasad Patel @ Mangala Patel Vs State of U.P. — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:102881

¶2

Court No. - 83

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 2053 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Mangala Prasad Patel @ Mangala Patel Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Iftakhar Ahmad Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶6

Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record. Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri R.M. Yadav, learned A.G.A. for the State and also perused the record.

¶7

The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in F.I.R./Case Crime No. 107 of 2022, under Sections 420, 406 IPC, Police Station Karchhana, District Allahabad, with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.

¶8

As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have duped the informant to the tune of Rs. 5 lakhs on the pretext that the said money shall be doubled in short span of time and later on, he refused to return the said amount.

¶9

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 next stated that the FIR is ambiguous. There is nothing on record that any money has been given to the applicant and it is not supported by any banking transaction. Learned counsel has next stated that the applicant has a criminal history of four cases, which has been explained.

¶10

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.

¶11

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.

¶12

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.

¶13

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 .

¶14

In the event of arrest of the applicant, Mangala Prasad Patel @ Mangala Patel 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:-

¶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 previous permission of the court;

¶18

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;

¶19

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.

¶20

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.

¶21

(Justice Krishan Pahal)

¶22

Order Date :- 12.5.2023\Shalini

¶23

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

Mangala Prasad Patel @ Mangala Patel v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mangala Prasad Patel @ Mangala Patel 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

Ashok Kushwaha Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Shivkunwar Rai Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Kamal Tyagi and Another Vs State of U.P.

Asad @ Mohd. Arshad Alam Vs State of U.P and 2 Others

Dileep Kumar and 3 Others Vs State of U.P.

Minakshi Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others