Allowed

Jai Prakash Oberoi v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC6 Sept 2023ABAIL/8658/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court granted anticipatory bail to the applicant in a cheating and criminal breach of trust case, relying on Supreme Court precedents. The court imposed standard conditions including surrender of passport and a personal bond.

What did the court decide?

Application allowed; applicant released on anticipatory bail on personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties under specified conditions.

Jai Prakash Oberoi Vs State of U.P. and Another — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:175421

¶2

Court No. - 73

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 8658 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Jai Prakash Oberoi Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Jai Raj 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- Jai Prakash Oberoi in connection with Case Crime No. 169 of 2022 under sections 420, 406 IPC, P.S.- Sadar Bazar, District- Agra.

¶8

It is alleged that named accused persons including the present applicant persuaded the informant to provide some money on false pretext of providing employment in the railway department and Rupees Six Lakhs were paid to them, however no employment was provided and the money was also not repaid. FIR was lodged on 27.4.2022 and investigation started and now charge sheet has been submitted.

¶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. It is further submitted that the prosecution case is really suspicious that the present applicant received the money from the informant / victim of the case for providing some employment. It is further submitted that the house where transaction is allegedly said to have been made, does not belong to the applicant and he has no concern with the aforesaid house at the alleged date of incident. It is further submitted that there is no written transaction between the parties regarding the payment of money and no money has been paid in the bank account of the present applicant. It is further submitted that as a matter of fact there is a history of litigations between the present applicant and father in-law of the informant and they have

¶10

been in strained and inimical relations and the applicant has been falsely implicated in the same. In case applicant is granted anticipatory bail, he 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 but however could not dispute this fact that no money transaction has been made in the bank account of the present applicant and he has been cooperative during course of investigation of the case, so far.

¶12

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. During course of investigation a notice under Section 41-A Cr.P.C. was given to to the applicant by the I.O. of the case. The offences levelled against the applicant are punishable with the imprisonment for a maximum period of seven years. No custodial interrogation is required in the matter.

¶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, 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

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

¶17

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.

¶18

The anticipatory bail application is allowed accordingly.

¶19

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 :-

¶20

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.

¶21

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

¶22

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.

¶23

iv. The applicant shall not leave India without prior permission of the Court and if he has passport, the same shall be deposited by her before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned.

¶24

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.

¶25

Order Date :- 6.9.2023 safi

¶26

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

Jai Prakash Oberoi v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jai Prakash Oberoi 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

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

Smt. Gena Devi Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Bachchoo and 7 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Jitendra Kumar Yadav Vs State of U.P. and Another

Vaseem Ahmad and 6 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Asgar and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another