Allowed

Sant Prakash Goel v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC12 Apr 2023ABAIL/2929/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court allowed an anticipatory bail application under Section 438 CrPC in a case involving cheating, forgery, and criminal breach of trust. The court held that the dispute appeared to be of a civil nature and granted bail till the end of trial subject to conditions including furnishing a bond.

What did the court decide?

Application allowed; anticipatory bail granted till the end of trial on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000 with two sureties.

Sant Prakash Goel Vs State of U.P. and Another — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 84

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 2929 of 2023

¶3

Applicant :- Sant Prakash Goel Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Prashant Kumar Singh,Satyawan Shahi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.

¶5

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

¶6

This application for anticipatory bail has been filed by applicant - Sant Prakash Goel in connection with Case Crime No.27 of 2019, under Sections 420, 406, 467, 468, 471, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Gorakhpur, District Gorakhpur.

¶7

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has no concern with the present matter. He has not committed any offence. He has been falsely implicated in this case. Allegations levelled against the applicant are false. It is further submitted that after investigation, charge-sheet has been submitted in the matter. If the applicant is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty and will cooperate with the investigation. The applicant has apprehension of his arrest by the police any time.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer.

¶9

It is alleged against the applicant that after the family settlement between the parties, the present applicant with a fraudulent intention, initiated some proceedings for mutation in his favour over some property which came into the share of the informant, who is said to be the real brother of the present applicant. It also reveals from the perusal of the record that by order of Addl. Nagar Ayukt, Nagar Nigam, Gorakhpur dated 30.4.2019, all the brothers have been mutated in the record of the Nagar Nigam in respect of their family property according to the family settlement. Chargesheet has been submitted in the matter and during the course of investigation, anticipatory bail was granted to the applicant by this Court vide order dated 24.6.2020 till filing of the police report under Section 173 (2) Cr.P.C. by way of Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No.6315 of 2020. The dispute prima facie appears to be of

¶10

civil nature. No further interrogation is required.

¶11

In Sushila Aggarwal and others vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and another, (2020) 5 SCC 1, the Hon'ble Apex Court has settled the controversy finally by holding the anticipatory bail need not be of limited duration invariably. In appropriate case, it can continue upto conclusion of trial.

¶12

It has been further held therein that anticipatory bail granted can, depending on the conduct and behavior of the accused, continue after filing of the charge sheet till end of trial.

¶13

It has been further held by the Hon'ble Apex Court that while considering an application for grant of anticipatory bail, the court has to consider the nature of the offence, the role of the person, the likelihood of his influencing the course of investigation, or tampering with evidence including intimidating witnesses, llikelihood of fleeing justice, such as leaving the country, etc. It has further been held that Courts ought to be generally guided by considerations such as the nature and gravity of the offences, the role attributed to the applicant, and the facts of the case, while considering whether to grant anticipatory bail, or refuse it. Whether to grant or not is a matter of discretion.

¶14

In the facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the fact that it seems to be a civil nature dispute as well as considering the settled principles of law regarding anticipatory bail, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, nature of accusation, role of applicant and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion of the merits of the case, in my view, it is a fit case for anticipatory bail to the applicant till end of the trial in the matter.

¶15

The anticipatory bail application is allowed.

¶16

In the event of arrest of the applicants in the aforesaid case crime, he shall be released on anticipatory bail till the end of the trial on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions :-

¶17

(i) The applicant shall make himself available before the court concerned on the date fixed in the matter;

¶18

(ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the

¶19

facts of the case so as to dissuade him / her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

¶20

(iii) The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court and if he has passport, the same shall be deposited by them before the S.S.P./S.P. Concerned.

¶21

In case of default of any of the conditions, same may be a ground for cancellation of protection granted to the applicant.

¶22

Order Date :- 12.4.2023 ss

¶23

Digitally signed by :- SANDEEP SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sant Prakash Goel v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sant Prakash Goel v. State of U.P. and Another

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

Deepak Rawat Vs State of U.P. and Another

Guddu Vs State of U.P. and Another

Manoj Bharadwaj Vs State of U.P.

Shyambir Vs State of U.P. and Another

Prashant and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Deepak Chahar and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another