Israr Ahmad Vs State of U.P.

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:129940

Court No. - 73

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 3399 of 2023

Applicant :- Israr Ahmad Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sunil Kumar Pandey,Himanshu Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ajay Sengar

¶5

Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.

¶6

This application has been moved on behalf of the applicant - Israr Ahmad seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.404 of 2022, under Sections 34, 420, 406, 467, 468, 471, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station, Kotwali Orai, District Jalaun.

¶7

Heard Sri Himanshu Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ajay Sengar, learned counsel for the informant as well as Sri Pankaj Kumar Tripathi, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶8

As per F.I.R., the present accused applicant, in connivance with other accused persons, grabbed about Rs.30 lakh from different persons and even after executing sale deed of different plots in their favour, the possession thereof was not handed over to them so far. The present accused applicant is one of the Directors of the delinquent Company. F.I.R. was lodged on 13.8.2022 and investigation started, which is going on.

¶9

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and he has apprehension of his arrest in the above-mentioned case, whereas there is no credible evidence against him. Allegations levelled against the applicant are false. He has been falsely roped in this matter. It is further submitted that the applicant has no fraudulent intention to commit any fraud with any of the vendees. The applicant and his Company are willing to hand over the possession of the sold plots to their respective vendees, but since a civil suit is pending in respect of subject matter of the present case and an interim injunction order has been passed by the competent civil court, the applicant or his Company is unable to hand over the possession to any of the vendees. It is further submitted that at the time of executing the registered sale deeds, the applicant was not aware of the pendency of any civil suit or injunction order passed by the civil court in respect of subject matter of the present case. It is further submitted that the applicant is cooperating with the investigation of the case. It is further submitted that no sale deed has been executed by the applicant in his personal capacity to any of the vendees. One more submission has been made by the counsel for the applicant that if anticipatory bail is granted to the applicant, he will try his level best to return the money to the

¶10

vendees from the fund of his Company.

¶11

Per contra, learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the informant vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail and submitted that it is an open case of fraud and forgery played by a Company and its office bearers to the public at large and being one of the Directors of the Company, the accused applicant cannot escape his liability. It is further submitted that the accused applicant and his Company were well aware of the fact that a civil suit has been filed before the competent civil court and an injunction order has been passed, but despite knowledge of this fact, they sold the plots in question, grabbed the money from number of persons and ultimately no possession was handed over to any of the vendees. It is further submitted that the accused applicant and his Company were in position to return the money taken from the members of the public / vendees, but they did not return the money to any of the vendees.

¶12

In Sushila Aggarwal and others vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and another, (2020) 5 SCC 1 , the Hon'ble Apex Court has held 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, likelihood 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.

¶13

In this matter, a huge money from the members of public has been fraudulently taken by the applicant and his Company.

¶14

Hence, 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 not a fit case for anticipatory bail to the applicant till the end of trial. The prayer made in the application is refused.

¶15

The anticipatory bail application is rejected .

¶16

Order Date :- 3.7.2023 ss

¶17

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

Israr Ahmad v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Israr Ahmad v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shyam Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Tinku Dubey Alias Pawan Kumar Dubey Vs State of U.P.

Tayyab Ali Vs State of U.P.

Nand Kishor Nayak Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Bobby Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ravi Vs State of U.P.