Ram Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:132839

Court No. - 73

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 7030 of 2023

Applicant :- Ram Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Akhilesh Kumar Ojha Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.

¶6

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

¶7

This application for anticipatory bail has been filed by applicant- Ram Kumar in connection with Case Crime No. 01 of 2022, under sections 467, 468, 471, 380, 504, 506, 420 IPC, P.S. Swaroopnagar, District Kanpur Nagar.

¶8

The F.I.R. of this case speaks about forgery committed by the present accused applicant along with other co-accused persons and it has been alleged that the deceased Mithlesh Kumari, the mother of the informant was admitted in the hospital and during treatment, the present accused applicant along with other coaccused persons obtained thumb impression of Mithlesh Kumari on some blank papers and on the basis of that, they were trying to grab the property of Mithlesh Kumari, who died during treatment in the hospital on 07.06.2021.

¶9

It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and he has apprehension of arrest in the above-mentioned case, whereas there is no credible evidence against him. Allegations levelled against the applicant are false. Charge sheet in the matter has been submitted. In case applicant is granted anticipatory bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and would obey all conditions of bail.

¶10

It is further submitted that the deceased Mithlesh Kumari was the real sister of the applicant, co-accused Sita is his wife and Prachi and Rinku @ Shyamu are the cousins of the informant. It is further submitted that the deceased Mithlesh Kumari with her free will had executed an unregistered will deed in favour of the present accused applicant. It is further submitted that since the informant, the daughter of the deceased had performed love marriage with her husband Ashish, Mithlesh Kumari was not pleased with them and she even insisted the Bank Manager to

¶11

seize her bank account so that the informant and her husband may not be able to get any money from her bank account. It is next submitted that the probate case has already been initiated by the applicant on the basis of the aforesaid will. It is further submitted that co-accused persons, namely, Nirmal Singh & Pradeep Kumar have been granted anticipatory bail by the coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 23.08.2022 & 26.09.2022 in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application No.7170 of 2022 & 9344 of 2022. It is next submitted that charge sheet has been filed in this case and now after filing of the charge sheet, no custodial interrogation is required. It is further submitted that the accused applicant has no criminal history and he has been cooperative to the I.O. of the case during the course of investigation.

¶12

Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the informant have opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail and submitted that the will dated 04.06.2021 allegedly executed by the mother of the informant, Smt. Mithlesh Kumari is a forged and fabricated document. It is next submitted that on the relevant date and time, Smt. Mithlesh Kumari was not in a fit of mind to understand the things and she was rather unconscious and statement to that effect has been given by the witnesses, doctors and the staff of the concerned hospital. It is further submitted that ample evidence has been collected against the accused applicant during the course of investigation and charge sheet has been filed against him on the aforesaid ground. A prayer for rejection of anticipatory bail has been made.

¶13

Having heard the rival submissions of both the sides of the parties and from the perusal of the record, prima facie, it appears that there is an unregistered will executed by the Mithlesh Kumari in favour of the present accused applicant although its genuineness has been put under doubt by the informant and its legality can be ascertained by a competent civil court.

¶14

It reveals from the perusal of the record that no process under Section 82/83 Cr.P.C. has been issued against the applicant till date and he has cooperated during the investigation.

¶15

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.

¶16

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.

¶17

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.

¶18

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 a fit case for anticipatory bail to the applicant till conclusion of trial in the matter.

¶19

The anticipatory bail application is allowed .

¶20

In the event of arrest of the applicant in the aforesaid case crime, he shall be released on anticipatory bail 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 :-

¶21

(i) 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.

¶22

(ii) The applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶23

(iii) The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.

¶24

(iv) The applicant shall not leave India without prior permission of the Court and if they have passport, the same shall be deposited by him before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned.

¶25

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the Investigating Officer shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail of the applicant in accordance with law.

¶26

Order Date :- 5.7.2023 Shivangi

¶27

Digitally signed by :- SHIVANGI YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ram Kumar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Kumar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Harendra Narayan Singh and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Malkhan Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Motilal Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Veer Bhadur Yadav and 7 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Usha Devi and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Veerendra Kumar Vs State of U.P.