Allowed

Rakesh v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC24 Jul 2023ABAIL/7933/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment grants anticipatory bail to the applicant in a cheating matter alleging fraud regarding an agreement to sale and cheque dishonour. The court held it a fit case for bail till the trial's conclusion, imposing a monetary bond and conditions regarding co-operation and non-fleeing.

What did the court decide?

The applicant was granted anticipatory bail till the end of trial on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000 with two sureties and complying with court conditions.

Rakesh Vs State of U.P. and Another — Property and Title | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:146903

¶2

Court No. - 73

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 7933 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Rakesh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Shiv Sharan Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.

¶6

This application has been moved on behalf of the applicant Rakesh seeking anticipatory bail in Case No. 466 of 2022, case crime no. 596 of 2020 under Sections 406, 420 IPC, Police Station Gandhipark, District Aligarh.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶8

It is 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. It is further submitted that no agreement to sale, as alleged in the F.I.R., has been executed by the applicant in favour of informant. It is also submitted that though two cheques have been mentioned in the F.I.R. to be given to the applicant as consideration amount while executing the agreement to sale but no such cheques were deposited in the bank account of the applicant. Dispute is purely of civil nature. After completion of investigation, charge sheet has been submitted in the matter. No process under Sections 82 and 83 CrPC has been issued against the applicant and the applicant has not been declared absconder. In case applicant is granted anticipatory bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and would obey all conditions of bail.

¶9

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

¶10

I have considered the rival submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties.

¶11

It has been alleged in the F.I.R. that after taking some amount from the informant and also after execution of agreement to sale,

¶12

the sale deed was not executed and money was grabbed by the applicant. F.I.R. was lodged and investigation started, which culminated into filing of the charge sheet. Applicant was cooperative during course of investigation. Alleged offences are punishable with the imprisonment for a maximum period of seven years. Applicant has no criminal history.

¶13

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, 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.

¶16

Considering the settled principles of law regarding anticipatory bail, nature of accusation, role of applicant and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, in my view, it is a fit case for anticipatory bail to the applicant till the end of trial.

¶17

The application is allowed accordingly.

¶18

In the event of arrest of the applicant, 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:-

¶19

(i) The applicant shall make himself available before the Court concerned on the date fixed in the matter and will cooperate in the trial.

¶20

(ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make any

¶21

inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police office.

¶22

(iii) The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court and if he has passport, the same shall be deposited by him before the S.S.P./S.P. Concerned.

¶23

In case of default of any of the conditions, the same may be a ground for cancellation of protection granted to the applicant.

¶24

Order Date :- 24.7.2023

¶25

safi

¶26

Digitally signed by :- MAHBOOB SAFI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Rakesh v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rakesh 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

Sufiyana Begum Vs State of U.P.

Tanseer Vs State of U.P. and Another

Om Prakash Mishra Vs State of U.P.

Shyam Ji Mishra Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shabana and 3 Others Vs State of U.P.

Shivam Vs State of U.P. and Another