Allowed

Babu Ram and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC17 Aug 2023ABAIL/7182/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. allowed considering nature of accusation, role of applicants, and lack of credible evidence. Bail granted till conclusion of trial subject to conditions.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted till conclusion of trial on furnishing personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each subject to specific conditions.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:166060

¶2

Court No. - 73

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 7182 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Babu Ram And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Satya Prakash Pandey,Ashish Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Manoj Kumar Srivastava

¶5

Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.

¶6

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

¶7

This application for anticipatory bail has been filed by applicants- 1. Babu Ram and 2. Mohd. Sarif in connection with Case Crime No.16 of 2023, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC, Police Station Jawan, District Aligarh.

¶8

It is alleged in the F.I.R. that the applicant no.2 Mohd. Sharif persuaded the informant to execute a sale deed of the land no.44, khasra 230, area 500 square yard, but all the accused persons, in collusion with each other, got executed the sale deed of the entire land of the informant and payment was made through cheque, but in the bank account of the informant, no amount was transferred. F.I.R. was lodged on 17.1.2023 and investigation started and now charge-sheet has been submitted

¶9

It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the applicants that applicants are innocent and they have apprehension of arrest in the above-mentioned case, whereas there is no credible evidence against them. Allegations levelled against the applicants are false. After investigation charge sheet has been submitted in the matter. It is further submitted that the applicant no.1 is only a witness to the alleged sale deed and no consideration has been passed in his favour nor he has received any wrongful gain. The applicants have no criminal history to their credit. It is further submitted that applicant no.2 is alleged only to provide one glass juice to the informant when she had visited the Tehsil office in connection with execution of the sale deed. It is further submitted that co-accused persons Shahid Umar, Mukhtyar Salmani and Yogesh Kumar have already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court in Cr. Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 7339 of 2023 by order dated 3.7.2023. In case applicants are granted anticipatory bail,

¶10

they shall not misuse the liberty of bail and would obey all conditions of bail.

¶11

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail.

¶12

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

¶13

Although the charge sheet has been submitted in this matter but 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.

¶14

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.

¶15

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.

¶16

Hence, considering the settled principles of law regarding anticipatory bail, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, nature of accusation, role of applicants 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 applicants till conclusion of trial in the matter.

¶17

The anticipatory bail application is allowed accordingly.

¶18

In the event of arrest of the applicants in the aforesaid case crime, they shall be released on anticipatory bail on their 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 :-

¶19

i. The applicants 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

¶20

ii. The applicants shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶21

iii.The applicants shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which they are accused, or suspected, of the commission of which they are suspected.

¶22

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

¶23

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 applicants in accordance with law.

¶24

Order Date :- 17.8.2023 Fhd

¶25

Digitally signed by :- FAHAD NIYAZ High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Babu Ram and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Babu Ram and Another 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

Mohd. Shafique Khan @ Aadil Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shoaib Vs State of U.P. and Another

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

Tarun Bishnoi Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rahul Srivastava Vs State of U.P. and Another

Jakir @ Chhabbis Vs State of U.P.