Allowed

Radheshyam Gupta v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC1 Aug 2023ABAIL/4297/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court granted anticipatory bail to the applicant in a cheating case registered under Section 438 Cr.P.C., allowing his release on bail subject to specific conditions including personal sureties and compliance with investigation requirements.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted to the applicant till conclusion of trial on furnishing personal and two sureties.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:153576

¶2

Court No. - 72

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 4297 of 2023 Applicant :- Radheshyam Gupta Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- R.S. Pandey,Mamta Pandey,Rajshree Malviya Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶5

List has been revised.

¶6

Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record.

¶7

Heard Ms. Rajshree Malviya, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Pankaj Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record.

¶8

The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No.232 of 2017, registered under Section 420 I.P.C. at Police Station- Bansgaon, District Gorakhpur with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.

¶9

As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have purchased the land from Smt. Tara Devi who happens to be a person belonging to scheduled caste. The applicant belong to OBC category, as such was not entitled to purchase the said land.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. He is a bona fide purchaser. The land has been vested in the State as a result of the said act. The applicant has suffered double losses, one pecuniary loss and the another this case instituted against him. Learned counsel has further stated that the case of civil nature has been converted into criminal one. 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. The criminal history of two cases assigned to the applicant stands explained. The applicant has apprehension of his arrest. Learned counsel for the applicant undertakes that he has co-operated in the investigation and is ready to do so in trial also failing which the State can move appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail.

¶11

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the

¶12

anticipatory bail application but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶13

On due consideration to the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. and considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of the applicant, the applicant is liable to be enlarged on anticipatory bail in view of the judgment of Supreme Court in the case of "Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi), (2020) 5 SCC 1" . The future contingencies regarding the anticipatory bail being granted to applicant shall also be taken care of as per the aforesaid judgment of the Apex Court.

¶14

In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed. Let the accused-applicant- Radheshyam Gupta be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on anticipatory bail till the conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶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 the previous permission of the court;

¶18

(iv). that in case charge-sheet is submitted the applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial;

¶19

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

¶20

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

¶21

(vii). that in case of breach of any of the above conditions the court concerned shall have the liberty to cancel the bail.

¶22

It is made clear that observations made hereinabove are exclusively for deciding the instant anticipatory bail application and shall not affect the trial.

¶23

(Krishan Pahal, J.)

¶24

Order Date :- 1.8.2023 Ravi Kant

¶25

Digitally signed by :- RAVI KANT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Radheshyam Gupta v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Radheshyam Gupta 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

Salim Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Ajeet Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Mohd. Zeeshan Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Anil Kumar Pandey Vs State of U.P.

Munesh Kumar Sharma Vs State of U.P. and Another

Anurag Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another