Allowed

Anurag Singh v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC2 Aug 2023ABAIL/4322/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court granted anticipatory bail to the applicant in a case involving sections 406, 419, 420, 467, 468, and 506 IPC, ordering him to execute a bond with sureties and comply with standard conditions while awaiting trial.

What did the court decide?

Granted anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties subject to ten specified conditions.

Anurag Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:155711

¶2

Court No. - 72

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 4322 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Anurag Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Anil Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Anil Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri Ashwini Kumar Tripathi, 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. 242 of 2022, under Sections 406, 419, 420, 467, 468, 506 IPC, Police Station Gorakhnath, District Gorakhpur, with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.

¶8

As per prosecution story, the wife of the applicant Smt. Nidhi Rastogi @ Nidhi Singh, is stated to have usurped an amount of Rs. 6 lakhs of the informant on the pretext that he shall be accorded a government job. It was alleged that the applicant was hand in gloves with the co-accused person Nidhi Rastogi.

¶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 money, if any, has been transferred to the account of his wife Nidhi Rastogi. Since then, both are living apart. Learned counsel has also stated that even the applicant has filed a divorce petition against his estranged wife.

¶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, Anurag Singh 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 concerned 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 :- 2.8.2023\Shalini

¶23

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

Anurag Singh v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anurag Singh 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

Radheshyam Gupta Vs State of U.P.

Salim Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Ajeet Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Anil Kumar Pandey Vs State of U.P.

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

Yunus Vs State of U.P.